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 2ND NOVEMBER 2009 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(Crl.).No. 413 of 2009(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SAJI.T.R. AGED 35 YEARS, S/O. T.G. RAJAN THYKOOTATHIL HOUSE, ANGADICAL PUTHENKAVU.P.O. CHENGANOOR, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDE OF POLICE ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CHENGANOOR, ALAPPUZHA. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHENGANOOR, ALAPPUZHA. 4. SOMAN, THYKOOTATHIL HOUSE, ANGADICAL PUTHENKAVU.P.O., CHENGANOOR, ALAPPUZHA. ADDL.R5. MONY ALIAS RADHAMONY, AGED 47 YEARS W/O. SOMAN, THYKOOTATHIL HOUSE ANGADICAL, PUTHENKAVU P.O. CHENGANNOOR. ADDL.RESPONDENT NO.5 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN I.A. NO. 13275/2009 DATED 2-11-2009. R1 & 2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. SMITHA SUKUMARAN ADV. SRI.N.ASHOK KUMAR FOR ADDL 5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== W.P.(C)NO. 413 OF 2009 ============================ DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2009 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The petitioner has come to this Court for issue of a wit of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce an adult major woman by name Anumol, aged about 23 years, daughter of the 4th respondent. According to the petitioner, he and the said Anumol are in love. According to him, there is no legal impediment to get married. The petitioner and the said Anumol want to enter matrimony. He accepts that he is aged about 38 years (he having been born in 1971, according to him.) Anumol is aged about 22 years – she having been born in 1987. The petitioner admits that he had earlier contracted a matrimony. But the said marriage, according to him,has now been dissolved WPCrl.413/2009 -2- by mutual consent through court. There is a child born in the said marriage aged about six years, he further submits. But according to the petitioner, he and the said Anumol are so attached to each other and are in love and they want to get their marriage solemnized under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act. According to him, his house and the house of the said Anumol are adjacent to each other. On coming to know of the relationship between him and Anumol, she has been taken away from the residence of the 4th respondent and she has been detained by the 4th respondent at some unknown place. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner had come to this Court with this writ petition. 2. This petition was filed on 12-10-2009. It was admitted on 14-10-2009 and the case was posted to 23-10-2009. This judgment must be read in continuation of the order dated 23-10-2009. 3. The 4th respondent, it is submitted, is not now available in India. He has gone abroad to his place of employment. His WPCrl.413/2009 -3- wife Mony @ Radhamony has filed an application to get herself impleaded. That petition is allowed and she is impleaded as the the additional 5th respondent . As agreed by her, the additional 5th respondent has appeared before court today with the alleged detenue. She is represented by her counsel. Along with the additional 5th respondent, her brothers N.G.Murali, K.G.Sasidharan and her brother-in-law Thampi are also present. 4. The alleged detenue has come along with the additional 5th respondent. The petitioner along with his counsel is present. 5. As the alleged detenue comes from the custody of the additional 5th respondent, we interacted with her in court. She stated that she is aged about 22 years. Her date of birth being 18-6-1987. She has passed B.Sc.degree and PGDCA course. She has now come to court along with the additional 5th respondent. But she stated that she wants permission of the court to interact with the petitioner herein. Accordingly, we permitted her to interact with the petitioner herein in the Chamber. WPCrl.413/2009 -4- 6. After lunch recess, we interacted with the alleged detenue in the Chamber. She adamantly insists that she wants to go along with the petitioner. Even our request to her to return today along with the mother and come back to the court after due thought and contemplation after seven days was not accepted by her. 7. The additional 5th respondent and her brothers and brother-in-law submit that the petitioner was a married man – he having divorced his earlier wife. As a divorcee, he has a six year old child. There is age difference of about 15 years between the petitioner and the alleged detenue. Going by their age and position/status, it is not proper for the alleged detenue and the petitioner to get married to each other. Their further case is that they are in prohibited degree of relationship and they cannot hence marry. 8. We interacted with the alleged detenue and mother separately initially but jointly thereafter. We interacted with the petitioner and his counsel separately initially, but subsequently WPCrl.413/2009 -5- along with the alleged detenue and her mother. Brothers of the additional 5th respondent and her brother-in-law were also permitted to interact with us and with the alleged detenue. 9. At the end of the day, we note that there is no agreement between the parties. The alleged detenue adamantly refused to go with her mother. She refused to be accommodated in a hostel for seven days. Even the additional 5th respondent does not want her to be so accommodated now. It is agreed now that the alleged detenue can be set at liberty and permitted to pursue whatever course she thinks is best suited to her. She asserts and adamantly insists that she will go only with the petitioner herein. She is not amenable to reason and she does not accept the request, demands and advice of her mother and uncles. The petitioner herein was requested by the additional 5th respondent to request her daughter, the alleged detenue to return with her for a period of only seven days. The petitioner also tried to do that but the alleged detenue adamantly WPCrl.413/2009 -6- refused to do the same and threatened the petitioner that she will commit suicide if the petitioner would not take her along with him. The petitioner, in these circumstances, agrees that he will take the alleged detenue with him if she wants to go with him. However, he submits that he shall accommodate the alleged detenue at his parental house at Chengannur which house is adjacent to the house of the additional 5th respondent. 10. We record these submissions of the parties. This writ petition can now be allowed and the alleged detenue can be permitted to leave the court as desired by her and she will be absolutely at liberty and shall have the freedom to pursue whichever course she thinks is best suited for her. She states and the petitioner agrees that they shall go from the court to the parental home of the petitioner adjacent to the house of the additional 5th respondent. 11. The additional 5th respondent wants to make a specific offer and wants the court to record that the alleged detenue can at any time come and stay with her at her residence adjacent to WPCrl.413/2009 -7- the parental home of the petitioner herein. The alleged detenue spurns the said suggestion also. 12. This writ petition is accordingly allowed to the above extent. R. BASANT, JUDGE M.C. HARI RANI,JUDGE ks.