IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 2ND JULY 2010 / 11TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 215 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.Y.SAMUEL, S/O.YOHANNAN, LINJU BHAVAN, KALLUVATHUKKAL, NEELASWARAM MURI, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL SMT.P.S.PREETHA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, POLICE HEADQUARTERS, KOLLAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION, XX KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM. (XX : THE WORD 'KARUNAGAPPALLY' REMOVED AS PER ORDER DATED 09/06/2010 IN WP(CRL)NO.215/2010.) 3. SRI.VENU, C.D. & D.V.D.HOUSE, NO.25TH MAIN BPM, 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE, RESIDING AT COSMO BAKERY AND BEAUTY PARLOUR, J.P.NAGAR, BANGALORE-76. SRI.R.RAYA SHENOI FOR R3 SRI.R.PRASANTH KUMAR FOR R3 SRI.K.K.MURUKmESAN FOR R3 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.(Crl) No.215 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of July 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 his daughter Ms.Linju, an adult major woman, aged 23 years (date of birth : 12/5/1987). The daughter of the petitioner, the alleged detenue, had completed the nursing course and was working as a trainee in the Sagar Apollo hospital at Bangalore. According to the petitioner, the alleged detenue had come to her native place to attend a marriage on 04/04/2010 and had left for Bangalore on 13/4/2010. She was missing thereafter and it is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner made a complaint before the Kottarakkara police and crime No.1320/2010 was registered on 30/5/2010. As the police did not succeed in tracing the alleged detenue, the petitioner came to this Court on 08/06/2010. This petition was admitted on 09/06/2010. This order must be read in continuation of the earlier orders passed by us resting with the order dated 18/6/2010. W.P.(Crl) No.215/10 : 2 : 2. Today when the case is called, the petitioner is present. He is represented by a counsel. Along with him, his wife, that is the mother of the alleged detenue has also come to Court. The allegation of the petitioner was that the alleged detenue was being illegally detained by the 3rd respondent at Bangalore. The 3rd respondent is present before Court. Along with him, the alleged detenue has also been brought to Court. The 3rd respondent is represented by a counsel. 4. As the alleged detenue has come to Court along with the/in the custody of the 3rd respondent, we thought it necessary to direct that the alleged detenue must remain in the chamber without opportunity for anyone to interact with her and influence her before we ascertain her response after the lunch recess. The petitioner and his wife requested and they were permitted to interact with the alleged detenue during the pre-lunch session. We interacted with the alleged detenue after the lunch recess. Initially, we interacted with her alone. Later, we interacted with her in the presence of her parents. Subsequently, we interacted with them in the presence of the 3rd respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the 3rd W.P.(Crl) No.215/10 : 3 : respondent and the learned Government Pleader were also present. 5. The alleged detenue states before us categorically that she is not under illegal detention or confinement. She was in love with the 3rd respondent and she has got married to the 3rd respondent after converting to Hinduism. A certificate issued by the Arya Samaj No.955 dated 17/6/2010 is produced for our perusal to confirm that she had converted into Hinduism. She, now, has taken the name Sindhoora. A marriage certificate No.3842 dated 19/6/2010 is also produced by the alleged detenue and the 3rd respondent to confirm that their marriage has taken place in accordance with Vedic rites on 19/6/2010. They are living happily at Bangalore, submit both the 3rd respondent and the alleged detenue. They are legally married spouses now, submit the alleged detenue and the respondent as also their counsel. 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 confinement or detention. After our interactions with the alleged detenue, we are convinced that she W.P.(Crl) No.215/10 : 4 : is not under any illegal confinement or detention. The petitioner and his wife are unable to accept the marital tie between the alleged detenue, their daughter and the 3rd respondent. Even though we tried to work out a harmonious settlement, we find that such attempts have not borne fruit now. 7. Having convinced ourselves that the alleged detenue is not under any illegal confinement or detention, we are satisfied that no further directions are necessary in this writ petition. 8. In the result, a) This writ petition is dismissed. b) The alleged detenue, who has come to Court along with the 3rd respondent, is permitted to leave the Court along with the 3rd respondent, as desired by both of them. 9. The certificates evidencing conversion and marriage are returned to the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent. 10. The alleged detenue and the 3rd respondent state before us that they apprehend violence and threats against them. They apprehend that may not be permitted to return peacefully to Bangalore from where they have come. We direct the learned W.P.(Crl) No.215/10 : 5 : Government Pleader to ensure that the alleged detenue and the 3rd respondent are permitted to return in peace to Bangalore. The alleged detenue and the 3rd respondent in particular submit that they have been threatened by one Baby John, a police constable, who happens to be the brother of the petitioner. The learned Government Pleader undertakes to do the needful and further informs this Court that he shall ensure that the Bangalore police is also instructed about the grievance of the alleged detenue and the 3rd respondent of the threat to their life from the relatives of the petitioner. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr W.P.(Crl) No.215/10 : 6 : R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.(Crl) No.215 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of June 2010 O R D E R Basant,J Service is not complete on party respondent No.3. The learned Government Pleader appears for respondents 1 and 2. The learned Government Pleader submits that the alleged detenue Ms.Linju, an adult major woman, is found to be missing. The 3rd respondent also, it is stated, is found to be missing. The police are making every effort to trace the alleged detenue and the 3rd respondent. Some further time may be granted to the police to trace the alleged detenue and the 3rd respondent, submits the learned Government Pleader. 2. The alleged detenue has been missing from 13/4/2010. The crime has been registered on 30/5/2010. We deem it proper to direct the 1st respondent to supervise and monitor the investigation personally and ensure the presence of the alleged detenue before this Court by the next date of posting. 3. Call on 02/07/2010. If the alleged detenue is not W.P.(Crl) No.215/10 : 7 : traced by then, the 1st respondent shall file a statement explaining to the court the steps taken and the results achieved. If the alleged detenue is traced prior to the next date of posting, needless to say, she shall be dealt with, in accordance with law and produced before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction. The learned Magistrate shall ensure that the alleged detenue appears before this Court on the next date of posting i.e. on 02/07/2010. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr W.P.(Crl) No.215/10 : 8 : W.P.(Crl) No.215/10 : 9 : R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 29/07/2009