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 MARCH 2009 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(Crl.).No. 94 of 2009(S) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- AYYAPPAN M.S. AGED 38 YEARS, S/O. LATE THAMI @ SWAMI, MADATHIPARAMBU HOUSE, CONVENT ROAD, MANJUMMEL P.O., ELOOR. BY ADV. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE SRI.A.V.JOJO RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, RURAL ALUVA. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ELOOR POLICE STATION. 3. P.R. JOSEPH, PAVANTHARA HOUSE, MANJUMMEL P.O., MANJUMMEL. 4. ANTONY RAPHAEL, PAVANATHARA HOUSE, MANJUMMEL P.O., MANJUMMEL. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTR SRI. JAI GEORGE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(CRL.) 94/2009. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT. P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 5.2.2009. EXT. P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 5.2.2009. A.K. BASHEER & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P. (Crl.) No. 94 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of March, 2009. JUDGMENT BASHEER, J, Ms. Anna @ Sony, D/o.Thomas, the alleged detenu is present in court along with her Uncles. Petitioner, who claims to be a friend of the detenu, is also present. We have interacted with the parties. Ms. Anna stated before us that she is not under illegal detention of any person as alleged in the writ petition. She has no connection whatsoever with the petitioner. She further states that petitioner had been harassing her with the persistent request to marry him. It was therefore that she had shifted her residence and started to live with her father's brother temporarily with the help of her other relatives. She admitted that she had given a signed statement before the Sub Inspector of Police, Eloor Police Station on March 3, 2009 narrating all the above aspects. 2. When this writ petition had come up for consideration on March 17, 2009, we had passed a detailed order before issuing notice to the party respondents. In the said order we had made it clear that if the detenu sticks to her version given before the police, the WP(Crl.).94/2009. 2 petition would be dismissed with a cost of Rs.25,000/-. Petitioner had readily agreed and stated before us that he would pay the cost if the detenu stated that she was not under confinement. Since Ms.Anna, the alleged detenu, has now stated before us that she has never been under illegal confinement as alleged in the writ petition, this writ petition is liable to be dismissed. We do so. But having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances, we do not impose any cost on the petitioner. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE sb.