IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS FRIDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2011 / 3RD ASHADHA 1933 WP(Crl.).No. 288 of 2011(S) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.SUKUMARAN NAIR, VIJAYA SADANAM HOUSE, RAMAPURAM MURI, KEERIKKAD VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.RENJITHKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KAYAMKULAM, P.O., KAYAMKULAM, PIN-690 502. 2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KAREELAKULANGARA POLICE STATION, NANGIARKULANGARA P.O., PIN-690 513. 3. SANGEETH, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, S/O.SATHEESAN, CHAPRAYIL HOUSE, CHINGOLI PANCHAYATH, CHINGOLI P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690 532. 4. SATHEESAN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, (NAME OF THE FATHER IS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), CHAPRAYIL HOUSE, CHINGOLI PANCHAYATH, CHINGOLI P.O.,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690 532. 5. ANIL, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, (NAME OF THE FATHER IS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), AAKKATHARA HOUSE, CHINGOLI PANCHAYATH,CHINGOLI P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690 532. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.M.KAMMAPPU. R3 TO R5 BY ADV. SRI.M.A.AUGUSTINE SRI.VARUGHESE CHERIAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPCR.NO.288/2011: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1.TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12.6.2011 BY THE PETITIONER. K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(Crl.) No.288 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 24th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus for production of his daughter Reshma. Allegation of illegal detention is made against respondents 3 to 5. Police protection for the life of the petitioner and his daughter from respondents 3 to 5 as well as from their henchmen is also sought. 2. We had interacted with the parties and passed orders. The alleged detenue, when she appeared before us would say that she is married to the 3rd respondent as per the Hindu rites. But, there is no dispute that the 3rd respondent with whom she is allegedly married has not attained the age of 21 years. Therefore, there is no valid marriage. The alleged detenue is a B.Sc.Nursing student in Kadappa, Andhra Pradesh. We also noted the anguish of the petitioner that studies of the alleged detenue may be interrupted. When the matter came up later on 17.6.2011, it was brought to our notice that the alleged detenue was booked in a train for joining the college so that she could WP Crl.288/11 S -2- complete the course. 3. Today, when the matter came up, it is common case that the alleged detenue has rejoined the college. Then the learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the 3rd respondent accompanied her and this may have deleterious effect on her further studies. Learned counsel for the 3rd respondent submits that 3rd respondent will not interfere with her studies. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent, on the other hand, would say that the Court may incorporate safeguards by which the petitioner will not compel the alleged detenue to undergo any marriage contrary to her wishes. We take note of both of these concerns and we record the submission of the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent that the 3rd respondent will not in any way interfere in the studies of the alleged detenue. We also direct that the petitioner will not in any way compel his daughter to undergo a marriage against her wishes. The Writ Petition (Criminal) is closed. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS