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 16TH AUGUST 2010 / 25TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 324 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MOHAMMED SAJU, AGED 25 YERS S/O.MOHAMMED KOYA, SHAJI BUILDINGS KARUVATTA PO, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.R.SUNIL KUMAR SMT.A.SALINI LAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. REGHUVARAN, SUMESH BHAVAN NANNIYYOODU, PALLUVALLY PO, PALODE, TRIVANDRUM, PIN 695 562. 2. CHANDRIKA, SUMESH BHAVAN NANNIYYOODU, PALLUVALLY PO, PALODE, TRIVANDRUM, PIN 695 562. 3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE RURAL, TRIVANDRUM 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE PALODE POLICE STATION, PALODE PION 678 583 ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN FOR R1,2 SRI.K.SATHEESH KUMAR FOR R1,2 SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.(Crl) No.324 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of August 2010 J U D G M E N T Basant,J The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce Ms.Sangeetha, aged 21 years (date of birth : 04/05/1988). According to the petitioner, he, a Muslim by religion, was in love with Ms.Sangeetha, a Hindu by religion. She is the daughter of respondents 1 and 2. Both the petitioner and Ms.Sangeetha had worked together as nurses when they were posted at the Mental Health Center, Thiruvananthapuram. According to the petitioner, they had decided to get married and some formalities were observed by them thinking that they were thereby getting married. According to the petitioner, respondents 1 and 2, the parents of the alleged detenue, are not in favour of the relationship between the petitioner and the alleged detenue. They are illegally detaining and confining the alleged detenue. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner came to this Court with this petition on 10/08/2010. The petitioner apprehended that the alleged detenue was being compelled by respondents 1 and 2 to marry another person against her will and desire. W.P.(Crl) No.324/10 : 2 : 2. This petition was admitted on 11/08/2010. Notice was ordered to the respondents. The case was posted to this date. 3. Today when the case is called, the petitioner is present. He is represented by a counsel. As the alleged detenue Ms.Sangeetha has come to Court along with respondents 1 and 2 who, allegedly, are detaining and confining her, we permitted the alleged detenue to remain alone in the chamber without opportunity for anyone to interact with or influence her. To our specific query, the alleged detenue Ms.Sangeetha told us that she does not want to have any interaction with the petitioner. In fact, she told us that she is afraid of the petitioner. 4. After the lunch recess, we interacted with the alleged detenue alone initially and later in the presence of her parents. Subsequently, we interacted with the alleged detenue in the presence of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Government Pleader were also present. 5. The alleged detenue Ms.Sangeetha stated before us categorically that she is not under any illegal confinement or detention. According to her, she is residing voluntarily and happily with her parents, respondents 1 and 2. She states that W.P.(Crl) No.324/10 : 3 : she is already scheduled to marry another person on 19/08/2010 and that she is entering matrimony voluntarily and willingly without any amount of pressure or compulsion from anyone including her parents. 6. In a petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus, we are primarily concerned with the question whether the alleged detenue is under any illegal detention or confinement. In the facts and circumstances of this case, we are convinced that the petitioner is not under any illegal detention or confinement. To a specific query by us, the alleged detenue stated before us categorically that she does not want to go with the petitioner and she wants to go along with respondents 1 and 2. She wants to get married on 19/08/2010 and wants to go along with the proposed bridegroom. She prays that the Court may ensure that she is not threatened or intimidated and that no harm is caused to her by the petitioner. She prays that there may be a direction to the petitioner not to harass or trouble her in any manner. 7. In response to our queries, the petitioner stated that he does not have with him any other photographs of the alleged detenue. According to him, all the photographs that are available have already been produced before this Court. W.P.(Crl) No.324/10 : 4 : 8. We are satisfied that having convinced ourselves that the alleged detenue is not under any illegal confinement or detention, this petition need only be dismissed. However, we take note of the grievance of the alleged detenue and her parents that they apprehend that the petitioner might make use of photographs and try to disrupt the marriage that is to take place on 19/08/2010. They further air an apprehension that the petitioner may cause harm to them when they return today from Court to their residence. The learned Government Pleader undertakes that the needful shall be done and that there shall be no difficulty whatsoever for the alleged detenue and her parents to return to their place of residence. The learned Government Pleader further submits that the needful shall be done by the police to ensure that the proposed marriage of the alleged detenue with another person scheduled to take place on 19/08/2010 is permitted to be carried out without any hindrance. 9. In the result, a) This writ petition is dismissed. b) The alleged detenue is permitted to leave the Court along with her parents respondents 1 and 2, as desired by her. c) Respondents 3 and 4 are directed and the learned Government Pleader undertakes that the alleged detenue and W.P.(Crl) No.324/10 : 5 : respondents 1 and 2 shall be permitted to return to their place of residence without any harassment or difficulties caused to them by the petitioner or persons acting at his instance. d) The learned Government Pleader undertakes that respondents 3 and 4 shall ensure that the proposed marriage of the alleged detenue takes place on 19/08/2010 without any hindrance or obstruction from the petitioner herein. If there be any such harm apprehended or caused to the alleged detenue and respondents 1 and 2 at the hands of the petitioner or persons acting under the petitioner, it shall be open to the alleged detenue and respondents 1 and 2 to complain to respondents 3 and 4, who shall immediately take necessary action. 10. Hand over copy of this judgment to the learned Government Pleader forthwith for immediate communication to respondents 3 and 4. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge W.P.(Crl) No.324/10 : 6 : W.P.(Crl) No.324/10 : 7 : W.P.(Crl) No.324/10 : 8 : R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 29/07/2009