IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI TUESDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(Crl.).No. 441 of 2009(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. K.J.THOMAS, KANNIKULATHIL HOUSE, KALIYAR P.O., IDUKKI - 685 582. 2. MOLLY THOMAS, KANNIKULATHIL HOUSE, KALIYAR P.O., IDUKKI - 685 582. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW PHILIP EDAPPALLIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. K.R.JANISH, KAVALAMMACKAL HOUSE, EZHACHERY P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 651. 2. KUNJUMON, KAVALAMMACKAL HOUSE, EZHACHERY P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 651. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALIYAR POLICE STATION, IDUKKI - 685 582. 4. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, IDUKKI - 685 603. 5. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM - 686 002. ADV. SRI.KRISHNADAS P. NAIR FOR R1 SMT.K.L.SREEKALA FOR R1 GOVT.PLEADER SMT.SMITHA SUKUMAR FOR R3 TO R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(Crl.)No.441 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 10th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2009 J U D G M E N T Basant, J. This judgment must be read in continuation of the earlier orders resting with the order dated 6th November, 2009. 2. The petitioners had come to this Court with this petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce their daughter Binumol Thomas, aged 24 years (date of birth 28.11.1985). The petitioners are the parents of the said Binumol Thomas. They apprehended that the alleged detenue was under the illegal confinement of respondents 1 and 2. Binumol Thomas is a Nurse by profession and the first respondent was a co-worker of hers, earlier. Second respondent is the father's brother of the first respondent. He was arrayed under the mistaken impression that he is the father of the first respondent. 3. Parties had appeared before this Court on 6.11.2009. After discussions with the parties, the alleged detenue had agreed to go with the petitioners to give them the assurance and W.P.(Crl.)No.441/09 -2- satisfaction that she is not acting at the behest of any other person and that she has taken the decision to go with the first respondent on her own. Accordingly, from 6.11.2009 to this day, the allege detenue has been residing along with the petitioners. 4. Today, when the case is called, the petitioners and their counsel are present. The petitioners have come along with the alleged detenue. We interacted with the alleged detenue and the alleged detenue reiterated that she is in love with the first respondent, that she wants to marry the first respondent and that she has taken that decision voluntarily and genuinely on her own and not because she is under the influence, threat or intimidation of anyone. 5. We are satisfied ourselves that the alleged detenue has taken the decision to go with the first respondent voluntarily and not under the improper influence of anyone. Even the petitioners now appear to be convinced that their daughter is not under any illegal confinement or detention of the first respondent. 6. The first respondent along with his parents is also present before Court. They are willing to take the alleged W.P.(Crl.)No.441/09 -3- detenue with them. Notice to perform/solemnise the marriage between the first respondent and the alleged detenue under the Special Marriage Act has already been given on 2.11.2009. The first respondent, his parents and the alleged detenue assure us that they shall get the marriage performed/solemnised under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act and shall report that fact to this Court, if the case is posted to a date after 2.12.2009. The alleged detenue, the first respondent and the parents of the first respondent agree and accept that until the marriage is performed, the alleged detenue and the first respondent shall not cohabit and that they shall cohabit as husband and wife only after their marriage is solemnised under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act on or after 2.12.2009. 7. Though, we attempted to work out a settlement between the parties, we note that the petitioners are unwilling to accept the marriage between their daughter and the first respondent. The parents of the first respondent are willing to co-operate and promise that they shall look after the alleged detenue as their own daughter and there shall be no difficulty for her at their residence. W.P.(Crl.)No.441/09 -4- 8. We are in these circumstances satisfied that this Writ Petition is only to be dismissed. We are convinced that there was no illegal confinement or detention of the alleged detenue Binumol Thomas, who is now aged 24 years and a Nurse by profession. We accept the submission of the alleged detenue, the first respondent and the parents of the first respondent that the marriage shall be performed and that the alleged detenue and the first respondent shall cohabit as husband and wife only after solemnisatin of their marriage. We accept their request to post the case to a date after 2.12.2009, so that they can produce the certificate of marriage by that date. 9. Call this petition again on 7.12.2009. The alleged detenue and the first respondent shall appear before this Court on that date along with the certificate of marriage issued under the Special Marriage Act. R.BASANT, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn W.P.(Crl.)No.441/09 -5- R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(Crl.)No.441 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 6th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2009 O R D E R Basant, J. The petitioners have come to this Court with this petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce their daughter Binumol Thomas, aged 24 years (date of birth 28.11.1985). The petitioners, the parents of the alleged detenue apprehended that their daughter is under the illegal detention and confinement of respondents 1 and 2. The petitioners were under the impression that the 2nd respondent is the father of the first respondent. He is not the father of the first respondent, but only his father's brother, it is now agreed by all concerned. 2. This petition was filed on 29.10.2009. It was admitted on 30.10.2009. Notice was ordered to the respondents and the case was posted to this day. 3. Today when the case is called, the petitioners are present. They are represented by their counsel also. The first respondent has come to Court along with his parents - W.P.(Crl.)No.441/09 -6- Mr.Rajappan and Mrs.Omana. They are also represented by their counsel. The alleged detenue has also come to Court along with the first respondent and his parents. 4. We ascertained the vital details from the alleged detenue in Court. We felt that before we ascertain further details and her crucial responses from her, as she comes from the custody of the first respondent and his parents, she must be permitted to leave alone and think and contemplate for herself the response that she should give to this Court. The petitioners - the parents of the alleged detenue wanted opportunity to interact with the alleged detenue. The same was also granted. The petitioners were permitted to interact with their daughter, the alleged detenue for about three hours. 5. We met the alleged detenue after lunch recess, in the Chamber. In our interactions with her, she asserted that she is not under illegal detention or confinement of anyone. According to her, the first respondent and she were colleagues in a hospital earlier. Both of them are Nurses. They are in love. They want to get married to each other. She was not kidnapped or abducted by the first respondent, but she had willingly joined the W.P.(Crl.)No.441/09 -7- first respondent with the intention of getting married. They have already registered a marriage agreement dated 25.9.2009. They have already given notice to get their marriage solemnised/registered under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act. That notice was given on 2.11.2009. Receipt to confirm the said fact is also placed before us for our perusal. 6. After interacting with the alleged detenue separately, we interacted with the petitioners and the alleged detenue together. Later, we interacted with the first respondent and his parents. Subsequently, we interacted with all of them together. The learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the first respondent were present. The learned Government Pleader was also present. 7. We are happy to note that at the end of the interactions, the parties appear to be coming closer to a harmonious settlement. To allay the apprehensions of the petitioners that the alleged detenue is being influenced and her will dominated by the first respondent, it was agreed that the alleged detenue shall go with the petitioners and live with them till 10.11.2009. During such period, the alleged detenue will be W.P.(Crl.)No.441/09 -8- permitted to reside at Kannikulathil House, Kaliyar P.O., Idukki and shall not be taken to any other place. In the house, no one other than the petitioners will be present. Of course, the maternal grandmother and the paternal grandmother of the alleged detenue can also be permitted to visit the alleged detenue in the house and stay there, if necessary. Till 10.11.2009, the alleged detenue and the first respondent shall be permitted to interact over the telephone between 8 a.m. and 9.a.m in the morning and 8 p.m. and 9 p.m in the evening. Till 10.11.2009, no other person shall be permitted to meet the alleged detenue. She shall not be permitted to be counselled by any other person, nor shall any medicines be administered to her. She shall be produced before this Court again on 10.11.2009 at 1.45 p.m. Appropriate further orders shall be passed on that date. The learned Government Pleader undertakes that the local Sub Inspector shall be given instructions to ensure that these conditions are complied with. Either party may move this Court earlier, if any emergent orders are necessary. 8. Call this petition again at 1.45 pm on 10.11.2009 in the Chamber. W.P.(Crl.)No.441/09 -9- 9. Hand over copy of this order to both counsel and to the learned Government pleader. R.BASANT, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn