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 3RD JULY 2009 / 12TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(Crl.).No. 164 of 2009(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- MANOJKUMAR, S/O. SHIVANKUTTY, T.C.2/1158, SUDHABHAVAN, MURINJAPALAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY SRI.AJITHKUMAR.S. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MEDICAL COLLEGE POLICE STATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. MAHEEN KANNU, PERAVILAKATHU VAYAL NIKATHIAYA VEEDU, VIZHINJAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. AMJED KHAN, S/O. MAHEEN KANNUR, `PERAVILAKATHU VAYAL NIKATHIAYA VEEDU, VIZHINJAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SHRI K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR FOR R1 TO R2 ADV. SRI.SHANAVAS.S FOR R3 & 4 SRI.V.S.SALIM FOR R3 & 4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.164 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 3rd DAY OF JULY, 2009 J U D G M E N T Basant, J. This judgment must be read in continuation of the order dated 8th June, 2009 and 26th June, 2009 passed by us. This petition brings to light an unfortunate tragedy in the life of the alleged detenue Aseema, a girl aged about 19 years, she having been born on 17.4.1990. Respondents 3 and 4 are her father and brother. The petitioner herein claims to be, and she accepts the same unreservedly, the lover of the alleged detenue. It is the case of the petitioner that the alleged detenue has been compelled by her close relatives to enter into a fraudulent marriage with a Male National, who is deaf and dumb. The said marriage allegedly was performed on 5.2.2009. It is contended that the said marriage is nothing, but an absolute and total fraud played on the alleged detenue. The alleged detenue was not willing for such a marriage and on coming to know of such marriage, she had eloped with the petitioner and had performed a marriage with him in accordance with the Hindu religious rites. The petitioner is a Hindu, whereas the alleged detenue is W.P.(C)No.164/09 -2- admittedly a Muslim. It is stated that they had given notice under the Special Marriage Act for registration of their marriage. But, the alleged detenue was forcibly taken away to her residence by respondents 3 and 4 and was allegedly kept under detention there. The petitioner helplessly had come to this Court for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to trace the alleged detenue, to produce her before this Court and to set her at liberty. Another Bench of this Court had admitted this petition filed on 27.4.2009. Counter affidavits filed by respondents 3 and 4 do not satisfy the Court and peremptory direction was issued on 26.5.2009 by us to all the respondents to ensure that the alleged detenue is produced before us on 8.6.2009. 2. Accordingly, the alleged detenue appeared/was produced before this Court on 8.6.2009. From her responses, it was clear that even though she did not want to accuse respondents 3 and 4 of any culpability, she was under confinement and she did not want to return along with respondents 3 and 4. The sequence of events is narrated in detail in the order dated 8.6.2009. As we perceived the possibility of settlement, parties were directed to work out a W.P.(C)No.164/09 -3- settlement and the alleged detenue was permitted to remain at the Santhinikethan Hostel until further orders. Thereafter, the matter has come up before us on a couple of occasions. But, it appears that respondents 3 and 4 have not been able to settle the dispute finally and work out a durable and healthy arrangement. The Male National is reluctant to settle the matter, it is submitted. 3. On 26.6.2009, when the matter came up for hearing, the alleged detenue was brought from the Hostel. She requested and we had permitted her to take the assistance of a lawyer. Hostel authorities were directed to permit the alleged detenue to take necessary legal advice. The case was hence posted to this day. 4. We have interacted with the alleged detenue in the Chamber today, in the presence of the counsel for the petitioner, the Government Pleader, the counsel for the alleged detenue and respondents 3 and 4. The alleged detenue for whom a counsel is entered appearance today, has filed a statement before Court today. She asserted before us today and has also stated clearly in the statement filed that she does not want to return with W.P.(C)No.164/09 -4- respondents 3 and 4. According to her, she has now been offered employment as a Sales Girl in a Pharmacy -S.N.Medicals, Murinjapalam, Medical College P.O., Thiruvananthapuram on a total monthly salary of Rs.4,000/- (Rs.2,500-Salary and Rs.1,500/-Allowance). She has further stated that she intends to stay at the Kerala Working Women's Association Short Stay Home at Udarasiromani Road, Vazhuthacaud, Thiruvananthapuram. She prays that she may be permitted to leave the Court and the Hostel where she is presently accommodated and may be permitted to lead a respectable life, residing at the above-said Hostel for earning her livelihood. She further submits that she intends to initiate appropriate legal proceedings to assail the fraudulent marriage which was allegedly performed on 5.2.2009. 5. The first preference of the alleged detenue and the petitioner was of course for an opportunity to live together. But, considering the fact that there is an alleged earlier marriage of the alleged detenue, notwithstanding her plea that such a marriage is fraudulent and void, the parties were persuaded to accept the present arrangement of the alleged detenue residing W.P.(C)No.164/09 -5- in a Hostel and earning her livelihood by a respectable employment and further steps being contemplated after appropriate steps are taken to assail her alleged earlier marriage. 6. The learned Government Pleader was requested to take instructions and the learned Government Pleader after taking instructions submits that the Hostel authorities are prepared to admit the alleged detenue in that Hostel. According to the learned Government Pleader, the Secretary of the said Hostel has confirmed that the alleged detenue can be accommodated there. 7. We are satisfied and convinced from the statement of the alleged detenue and the totality of inputs available before us that the alleged detenue was under restraint and was not at liberty to move around as desired by her. She does not want to return with respondents 3 and 4. She is an adult major woman, she having crossed the age of 18 years. We find no reason not to accept her desire that she must be set at liberty and permitted to reside in the Hostel referred above and earn a respectable living by taking up employment at the Pharmacy – S.N.Medicals, where she has secured employment. W.P.(C)No.164/09 -6- 8. The counsel for respondents 3 and 4 in response to a specific query by us state that they are having no objection against their daughter/sister taking up such employment and pursuing such avocation by residing at the said Hostel. 9. There shall be a direction to the Police to afford necessary protection to the alleged detenue to reside in the said Hostel and pursue her employment at S.N.Medicals, Thiruvananthapuram. The learned Government Pleader shall convey this direction to the Commissioner of Police, Thiruvananthapuram, who shall take necessary steps. If the parties require any further directions, they shall be at liberty to approach this Court for such further directions. 10. The alleged detenue Aseema Beevi @ Aseema is now permitted to proceed to the said Hostel at Thiruvananthapuram and take up residence there as desired by her. The alleged detenue requests that she may be permitted to remain in the present Hostel (Santhinikethan) for this day and may be permitted to leave the Hostel tomorrow. It is submitted that the petitioner has been paying the expenses at the Hostel and that he shall clear the entire liability, before the alleged detenue W.P.(C)No.164/09 -7- leaves the Hostel tomorrow. The Santhinikethan Hostel authorities shall permit the alleged detenue to leave the Hostel by tomorrow morning, so that she can be at the Hostel at Thiruvananthapuram referred above by evening tomorrow. 11. We record our appreciation for the willingness with which the alleged detenue has been accommodated at the Santhinikethan Hostel by the Hostel authorities. The Secretary of the Kerala Working Women's Association Short Stay Home, Thiruvananthapuram shall accommodate the alleged detenue there as agreed with the learned Government Pleader in accordance with their rules. 12. This Writ Petition is accordingly allowed on the above terms. 13. Handover a copy of this judgment to the alleged detenue. R.BASANT, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn W.P.(C)No.164/09 -8- R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(Crl)No.164 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 26th DAY OF MAY, 2009 O R D E R Basant, J. Respondents 3 and 4 who are the father and brother of the alleged detenue are not present before Court, as directed. A counter affidavit has been filed by them. The crux of the grievance raised by the petitioner is that the alleged detenue has been detained by respondents 3 and 4. Respondents 3 and 4 contend that she has already been married to another person. The conduct of respondents 3 and 4 does arouse suspicion and reservation. In these circumstances, a direction is issued to the respondents to produce the alleged detenue by name Aseema before this Court to ascertain whether there is any illegal detention/confinement. Respondents 1 and 2 shall procure the presence of the alleged detenue by the next date of posting. Call on 8.6.2009. R.BASANT, JUDGE. W.P.(C)No.164/09 -9- M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn