IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2010 / 31ST JYAISTHA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 198 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SHAMON.S, AGED 23YEARS, S/O.SASIDHARAN SASI MANDIRAM,NEDUMAKAVU MURI KAREEPRA VILLAGE, KOTTARAKKARA TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.ANIL KUMAR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE OFFICE OF THE C.I.OF POLICE, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE ATTINGAL POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 4. MASSODHI LAL ARATTUVILA HOUSE, KANNANALLOOR, KANNANALLOOR PO KOLLAM DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.J.MUHAMMED ANZAR ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN FOR R4 SRI.R.REJI FOR R4 SMT.THARA THAMBAN FOR R4 SRI.B.BIPIN FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ********************** W.P(Crl.) No.198 of 2010 ********************* Dated this the 21st day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T BASANT, J. This judgment must be read in continuation of our earlier orders passed in the matter resting with the order dated 14.06.2010. 2. Today when the case is called, the petitioner is present. He is represented by a counsel. Along with him, his sister-Shymol and her husband-Shaji have come to Court. The 4th respondent and his wife Ruby Haseena are also present. The 4th respondent is represented by a counsel. The learned Government Pleader is also present. 3. We interacted with the alleged detenue Sajna in the Chamber after lunch recess. She takes a firm and definite stand that she is thought over the matter in all its dimension and she now wants to go with the petitioner. She raises no complaint against her father, mother and relatives, but she states that it is her firm decision that she must be permitted to go along with the petitioner and get her marriage with him solemnised and registered in W.P(Crl.) No.198 of 2010 2 accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act. Notice has already been given on 21.05.2010 under the special Marriage Act and the marriage can now be registered at any time. 4. After interaction with the alleged detenue alone initially, we called the 4th respondent and his wife. In front of the 4th respondent and his wife also the alleged detenue asserted specifically that she wants to go along with the petitioner. The 4th respondent and his wife are unable to accept the relationship between the alleged detenue and the petitioner. They submit that it was their impression that the alleged detenue will return along with them from the Court today. Unable to stand and tolerate the decision of the alleged detenue, both of them went out of the Chamber in grief. 5. We subsequently interacted with the alleged detenue in the presence of the petitioner and his sister Shymol. The petitioner states that he is willing to take the alleged detenue with him. He has the blessings and support of his mother, sister and brother. His sister's husband, ie. the brother in law of the petitioner, is also willing to accept the relationship. The petitioner's father had expired more than a decade back. In W.P(Crl.) No.198 of 2010 3 these circumstances, the petitioner states that he will take the alleged detenue along with him and ensure that the marriage is solemnised and registered under the Special Marriage Act at the earliest. The alleged detenue confirms that she wants to go with the petitioner and that she will get her marriage with the petitioner solemnised in accordance with the Special Marriage Act as per notice of marriage already given on 21.05.2010. 6. We are satisfied, in these circumstances, that the preference of the alleged detenue, an adult major woman, aged above 18 years (date of birth 08.09.1991), has to be followed. She has been given sufficient time and she was sent back with her parents from 04.06.2010 to this day to enable her parents to advise her and counsel her. We are, in these circumstances, left with no alternative but to accept the preference of the alleged detenue. 7. The petitioner as well as his sister state that the alleged detenue can continue to follow her choice in religion and they do not in any way want to influence her to convert her religion. That submission is also taken note of and recorded. 8. This Writ Petition is, in these circumstances, allowed. We accept the statement of the alleged detenue that she wants W.P(Crl.) No.198 of 2010 4 to leave Court along with the petitioner herein. We accept their submission that their marriage in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act shall be solemnised and registered and the certificate of marriage shall be produced before this Court by the next date of posting. 8. Call on 01.07.2010 for production of marriage certificate by the petitioner and the alleged detenue. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) rtr/ W.P(Crl.) No.198 of 2010 5 R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ********************** W.P(Crl.) No.198 of 2010 ********************* Dated this the 14th day of June, 2010 ORDER BASANT, J. The petitioner, the alleged detenue and the 4th respondent W.P(Crl.) No.198 of 2010 6 are present. Along with the alleged detenue, her mother Ruby Haseena has also come to Court. The petitioner and the 4th respondent are represented by their counsel. The learned Government Pleader is also present. 2. We interacted with the alleged detenue in the Chamber after lunch recess. The alleged detenue as well as all concerned confirm that the directions issued on 04.06.2010 are being complied with and none of them has any complaint about non compliance of those conditions. In these circumstances, we are satisfied that the case can now be adjourned to 21.06.2010, on which day we expect the alleged detenue to convey to us her final decision in the matter. 3. Call on 21.06.2010. We further reiterate that all the conditions imposed on 04.06.2010 shall continue to remain in force till 21.06.2010. It is reported that though there was a direction that the alleged detenue must write her first year T.T.C Examination starting on 07.06.2010, on account of reasons beyond the control of the alleged detenue and all others concerned, she could not appear for the examination on 07.06.2010. No party has any complaint against the inability of the alleged detenue to comply with the said direction. W.P(Crl.) No.198 of 2010 7 (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) rtr/