IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 5TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 14TH BHADRA 1933 WP(Crl.).No. 389 of 2011(S) --------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. JOSEPH, S/O. MATHAI, PATTIMAVIL HOUSE, ULLANAD.P.O., PALA(VIA) KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. MARY JOSEPH, W/O. JOSEPH, KAVUNKAL HOUSE, THUDANGANAD.P.O.,THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 3. MATHEW.P.M., S/O. MATHAI, AGED 55 YEARS, PATTIMAVIL HOUSE, ULLANAD.P.O., PALA(VIA), KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS SMT.CELINE JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. MARIAKUTTY MICHAEL, W/O.MICHAEL, PATTIMAVIL HOUSE, KADANAD.P.O., PALA(VIA), KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686653. 2. BITTO MICHAEL, S/O.MICHAEL, PATTIMAVIL HOUSE, KADANAD.P.O., PALA(VIA), KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686653. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MELUKAVU POLICE STATION, MELUKAVU, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686652. ADV. SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE FOR R1 & 2 R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SHRI. LAKSHMI NARAYAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WP(CRL) 389/2011 PETITIONERS EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT. 18-8-2011 SUBMITTED BY 1ST PETITIONER EXT.P2: -DO- OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT jj /TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(Crl)NO: 389 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th September, 2011. JUDGMENT Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. The petitioners are siblings of the alleged detenu. The private respondents are the wife and son of the alleged detenu. With the materials we were told that the alleged detenu is with the Sacred Heart Hospital, Paingulam. The PRO of that hospital is before us with medical records. We have gone through that. We do not find any ground to hold that the alleged detenu is illegally detained. 2. We record the submission of the petitioners that they are prepared to assist if the detenu needs better treatment in some other hospital and also for his better management. The petitioners, if so advised, will interact with the authorities of the aforesaid hospital who will, in concurrence with the wife and son of the alleged detenu, permit the petitioners to place their views also so that if the alleged detenu requires any better medical aid as may be required, the authorities of the Sacred Heart WP(Crl)389/2011 2 Hospital will advise accordingly. The petitioners will be provided an opportunity of visitation to meet the alleged detenu subject to timings and other restrictions as may be imposed by the hospital authorities as found necessary. Ordered accordingly. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj/5/9/2011 WP(Crl)389/2011 3