IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DECEMBER 2010 / 1ST POUSHA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 475 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- MIDHUN MOHAN, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.R.MOHANAN, THOTTUMKARA VEEDU, THZHAM SOUTH, CHATHANNOR PO, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.L.SURESH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHATHANNOR STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHATHANNOR STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. A.SAINUDHEEN, SHABNAM MANZIL, MEENADU EAST, CHATHANNOR PO, KOLLAM 691 572. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEAADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR ADV. SMT.S.KARTHIKA FOR R-3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(Crl) No.475 of 2010 ***************************** Dated this the 22nd day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. This judgment must be read in continuation of the earlier orders passed by us in the matter resting with the last order dated 14.12.2010. According to the petitioner, the alleged detenue Shibina, a young woman, aged above 23 years (date of birth - 24.05.1987), is his wife, she having married him under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act on 18.08.2010. The petitioner apprehended that his wife, the alleged detenue, was being illegally detained and confined by the 3rd respondent, her father. 2. The alleged detenue came to Court on 14.12.2010. We granted her time to think over the matter and give her final response to us. She went along with her father, the 3rd respondent. Today she has come to Court along with her father, the 3rd respondent. The petitioner is present He is represented by his counsel. The 3rd respondent is present. He is also represented by his counsel. W.P(Crl) No.475 of 2010 2 3. We interacted with the alleged detenue alone initially and later in the presence of the petitioner and the 3rd respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent and the learned Government Pleader were also present. 4. The alleged detenue states before us that she has taken the decision to go with the petitioner. We can easily perceive that it is a traumatic decision for her. We repeatedly wanted to ascertain from her whether it is her final, genuine and well thought out decision. An element of confusion in her is easily perceivable, she being now torn between her yearning to join her husband, the petitioner and the advice and counsel of her father, the petitioner, and other relatives. All the same, she asserts that she wants to live with the petitioner. 5. The alleged detenue is an adult major woman, aged above 23 ½ years. She is an educated woman. We accept her decisional autonomy. We are satisfied that her decision, that she must be permitted to leave with her husband, the petitioner, can safely be accepted by the Court. 6. In the result: a) This Writ Petition is allowed; W.P(Crl) No.475 of 2010 3 b) The alleged detenue Shibina is permitted to leave the Court along with the petitioner, her husband, as per Ext.P1 certificate of marriage issued under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, as desired by her. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/