IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2009 / 19TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(Crl.).No. 309 of 2009(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------- CHENOTH SHAMEER AGED 25 YEARS, S/O. SULAIMAN, CHENOTH HOUSE, KANHIRAPPARA, P.O., THUNDIYIL, PERAVOOR, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.VIJAYAN SRI.S.P.SURESH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. POTHODY RAMESHAN, S/O. GOPALAN, AGED 49 KRISHNAKRIPA KIZHUTHALLY, ELAYAVOOR, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. V. REETHA, W/O. RAMESHAN, AGED 40 KRISHNAKRIPA KIZHUTHALLY, ELAYAVOOR, KANNUR DISTRICT. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KANNUR TOWN POLICE STATION, KANNUR. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KANNUR, TOWN POLICE STAION, KANNUR. 5. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KANNUR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & M.C. HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(Cri) No. 309 of 2009-S ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The petitioner - a young man aged 25 years, has come to this Court for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce Ms. Reshma - a young girl aged about 18 years, the daughter of respondents 1 and 2, with whom the petitioner claims to be in love. According to the petitioner, he and the alleged detenue knew each other for some period of time and were in deep love. 2. Ms. Reshma had come out of her house on her own and the two had decided to go away and get married. On 27/5/09 they had left Kannur; but they were traced later on the same day at Guruvayoor. The two were brought back. The girl is living with her parents now. She was produced W.P.(Cri) No. 309 of 2009-S -: 2 :- before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and the learned Magistrate had permitted her to go with her parents. 3. According to the petitioner, Ms. Reshma is in illegal confinement and detention by her parents - respondents 1 and 2. It is his apprehension that she is being detained against her will and desire by respondents 1 and 2. Airing those apprehensions, he had come before this Court on 3/8/09 with this writ petition. 4. This writ petition was admitted on 4/8/09 and notice was ordered to the respondents. Today, when the case came up for hearing, the petitioner and his counsel are present. Respondents 1 and 2, who are represented by a counsel, are also present. The alleged detenue Ms. Reshma is present in court along with her parents. 5. We interacted with Ms. Reshma in the Court when the case was called. We gave her time to think, contemplate and give us her response. To our specific question in court whether she wants to interact with the petitioner, she stated that she does not want to do the same. Ms. Reshma was permitted to remain in the Chamber without being influenced by any one. After 1.45 p.m. when we sat in the Chamber, we called Ms. Reshma and had interactions with her. Ms. Reshma stated W.P.(Cri) No. 309 of 2009-S -: 3 :- before us that she is aged above 18 years, she having been born on 16/5/91. To our specific query, she stated that she is not under confinement or detention by any one. We interacted with the parents of Reshma as also the petitioner and his counsel. In the presence of the petitioner, Ms. Reshma stated that she is not under confinement or detention. In response to a specific query put by this Court, Ms. Reshma stated before us that if she were given option/liberty to go from the Court with whosoever so pleases, she would choose to go with her parents. She did not, of course, deny her relationship with the petitioner. 6. In a petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus, this Court is primarily concerned with the question whether the alleged detenue is detained by any one against her will, desire and volition. We are satisfied from the totality of circumstances available in this case that Ms. Reshma is not under illegal detention or custody of respondents 1 and 2. Respondents 1 and 2 assure this Court that they will not marry away the alleged detenue against her wishes, will or desire and that the question of her marriage will be considered only after she is in a position to take an informed decision. 7. We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that no further directions are necessary in this writ petition. This writ petition W.P.(Cri) No. 309 of 2009-S -: 4 :- is, accordingly, dismissed. The alleged detenue Ms. Reshma is permitted to leave this Court along with her parents - respondents 1 and 2. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- M.C. HARI RANI (Judge) Nan/ //True Copy// P.S. to Judge W.P.(Cri) No. 309 of 2009-S -: 5 :-