IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 1ST PHALGUNA 1930 WP(Crl.).No. 70 of 2009(S) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- SHAJI MATHEW, AGED 37,S/O.MATHEW, MUTTAMOOTTIL HOUSE, VALAKOM.P.O, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTARAKKARA. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTARAKKARA. 4. AMMINI, M/O.LISSY, MOOLAMOOTTIL HOUSE, ANANDAPPALLY.P.O,ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. 5. JESSY,MOOLAMOOTTIO HOUSE, ANANDAPPALLY. PO, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. RAVINDRA BABU ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ FOR R4 & R5 SRI.SAJJU.S FOR R4 & R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(CRL.) 70/2009. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT. P1 : A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PASSPORT OF LISSY SHAJI. EXT. P2 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. A.K. BASHEER, J. & P. BHAVADASAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (Crl.) No. 70 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of February, 2009. JUDGMENT BASHEER, J, Petitioner alleges that his wife and minor child, aged five years, are being detained by respondents 4 and 5, who are his mother- in-law and sister-in-law respectively. 2. According to the petitioner, he had married Ms.Lissy in December, 2001 and his minor daughter Silla Sara Shaji was born in the said wedlock in 2004. He further states that he is employed in Sharjah, and came back to his village about two and a half months back. He did not find his wife and child in his house at Valakom, “who were living there according to his knowledge”. 3. Petitioner alleges that his wife and child had left the house two weeks before his arrival and are now living along with respondents 4 and 5. He further claims that he rushed to the house of respondents 4 and 5 in order to meet them. But respondents 4 and 5 were reluctant to give any positive answer to the queries made by him. 4. The further allegation in the writ petition is that he again went to the residence of respondents 4 and 5 on January 29, 2009 WP(Crl).70/2009. 2 and made inquires of the whereabouts of his wife and daughter. Respondents 4 and 5 called Janamaithri police, and according to the petitioner they threatened him and warned him not to go there again. Petitioner further alleges that he submitted Ext.P2 petition before respondent No.3, Sub Inspector of Police, Kottarakkara on January 30, 2009. But respondent No.3 did not take any action on Ext.P2 petition. 5. The specific case of the petitioner is that respondents 4 and 5 are keeping his wife and daughter under illegal detention at some “unknown place”. He laments that his wife and child are so helpless that they are not in a position to come out of the illegal detention and join him. He has received reliable information that respondents 4 and 5 would allow him to contact his wife and child only if he conveys his entire properties in their favour. It is on the basis of the above allegations that the petitioner has preferred this writ petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus. 6. Mrs. Jessy, respondent No.5, who is the sister of the alleged detenu Ms.Lissy Shaji, the wife of the petitioner, has appeared before the court in person along with the minor daughter of the petitioner. She stated before us that the entire allegations made by the petitioner in the writ petition are totally false and baseless. She further states that the young girl Ms.Silla Sara Shaji is now studying in St.Kuriakose Nursery School, WP(Crl).70/2009. 3 Anandappally, Adoor. She was admitted in the said school about two years ago. Initially she was put in the play school section and now she is studying in the LKG class. Respondent No.5 has produced the Students' Diary issued in the name of the child from the school. 7. Mrs. Jessy further stated before us that her sister, petitioner's wife, has been working in Abu Dubai for the last seven months. According to respondent No.5 petitioner was all along aware that the minor child is studying in St.Kuriakose Nursery School since the last two years. Petitioner was also aware that his wife is now working in Abu Dubai. 8. Learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5 would submit before us that this is a clear instance of abuse of process. According to him, the averments made by the petitioner would by themselves show that he has been trying to mislead this court. 9. Learned Government Pleader submits that the Sub Inspector of Police, Kottarakkara, who is present in court along with the relevant file, has informed him that the petitioner had not filed Ext.P2 before him as alleged in the writ petition. On the contrary, in his signed statement given by the petitioner before the Sub Inspector he had stated that he had only approached Adoor Police in this connection so far. Petitioner had further stated that he had not so far given any complaint before the Kottarakkara WP(Crl).70/2009. 4 Police. Thus obviously petitioner has made an incorrect statement in the writ petition. 6. We are not inclined to believe the assertion made by the petitioner that he was not aware of the whereabouts of his wife and child. In our view, this writ petition is nothing but a sheer abuse of process of court. Such a conduct cannot be countenanced. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as cost to the child. If the said amount is not paid by the petitioner within one month by way of a Demand Draft, respondent No.5 shall be entitled to recover it from him, on behalf of the minor, in accordance with law. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sb.