IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2010 / 26TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 318 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHYLA BEEGUM, W/O. MOHAMMED PARVEEN SHAH @ PRAVEEN CHANDRAN, PUTHUVAL PUTHENVEEDU, CRPF, PALLIPPURAM, KAZHAKKOOTTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.D.VIJAYAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (LAW & ORDER) POLICE HEADQUARTERS,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VALIYATHURA POLICE STATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. V.PREMA, W/O. RAMACHANDRAN (LATE) 34/58, WIRELESS VETTUCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. LAILA 34/58, WIRELESS VETTUCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 7. SNTHOSH.KP. S/O. PRAKASH, TITANIUM KOCHUVELI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 8. LAL, PWD CONTRACTOR, ALUMINIUM FABRICATION, NEAR SAT HOSPITAL. 9. PRASAD, PWD CONTRACTOR, ALUMINIUM FABRICATION, NEAR SAT HOSPITAL. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.(Crl) No.318 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of August 2010 J U D G M E N T Basant,J The petitioner, a young woman aged about 34 years, has come to this Court with this petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce her husband Mr.Praveen Chandran alias Mohammed Praveen Shah. 2. The petitioner was already married earlier and two children aged about 8 years and 7 years were born in that wedlock. She was divorced by her former husband and, in these circumstances, she contracted a second marriage with the alleged detenue. The said marriage was solemnised and registered under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act on 29/08/2008. Ext.P1 certificate of marriage evidences such marriage. It is the case of the petitioner that the alleged detenu had subsequently converted to Islam and had taken the name Mohammed Praveen Shah. Ext.P2 is a certificate produced by the petitioner to indicate that the alleged detenue had converted to Islam. According to the petitioner, subsequently the alleged W.P.(Crl) No.318 of 2010 2 detenu was taken away by his relatives and friends and were not permitted to live with her. In these circumstances, she lodged a complaint before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram. The Sub Divisional Magistrate registered the proceedings as M.C.No.02/09. There, the alleged detenue entered appearance and filed an affidavit under which he confirmed that he shall resume co-habitation with the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that subsequently the alleged detenu, her husband, has again been illegally detained and confined by respondents 5 to 9, the mother and other friends/relatives of the alleged detenu. They are not permitting the alleged detenu to interact with the petitioner. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner came to this Court with this petition on 04/08/2010. 3. This petition was admitted on 05/08/2010 and the matter was posted to this date. Today when the case is called, the petitioner is present. She is represented by a counsel. Respondents 5 to 9, though served, have not chosen to enter appearance. The alleged detenue has come to Court. It is submitted that the police have brought him to Court today. W.P.(Crl) No.318 of 2010 3 4. We interacted with the alleged detenue in Court. The alleged detenu states before us that he is aged 24 years. It is true that he had undergone marriage ceremony with the petitioner. It is true that before the Sub Divisional Magistrate,he had filed an affidavit to the effect that he wants to resume co- habitation with the petitioner. It is pointed out that the alleged detenu is a person aged about 24 years now. The petitioner is a woman aged about 34 years. She was earlier married and has two children in the said wedlock. The alleged detenu states before us in Court that he is afraid of the petitioner and he does not want to resume co-habitation with the petitioner. According to him, he is not under illegal confinement or detention of anyone and he, on his own, has taken the decision not to reside along with the petitioner. 5. In a petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus, we are primarily concerned with the question whether the alleged detenu is under any illegal detention or confinement. It appears that there is some obvious disputes and disharmony in the matrimony between the petitioner and the alleged detenu. At any rate, the alleged detenu, we are satisfied is not under any W.P.(Crl) No.318 of 2010 4 illegal confinement or detention and we are convinced that it is not necessary to invoke our extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue any directions. 6. In the result, a) This writ petition is dismissed. b) The alleged detenu is informed that he is at liberty to pursue whatever course he thinks is best for him. We make it clear that the dismissal of this petition will not in any way fetter the rights of the petitioner to initiate and pursue appropriate matrimonial proceedings before appropriate fora to claim appropriate reliefs. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge W.P.(Crl) No.318 of 2010 5 W.P.(Crl) No.318 of 2010 6 R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 19/07/2010