IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2010 / 30TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 282 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SREEDEVI AMMA, W/O. LATE GANGADHARAN NAIR, UMABHVAAM, PANAYEL.P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RASHEED C.NOORANAD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NOORANAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. SANTHOSH, S/O. OMANAYAMMA, KAVARATH KUTTIYIL, CHERUKUNNAM, ANAYADI. ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ FOR R2 SRI.SAJJU.S FOR R2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.(Crl) No.282 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of July 2010 J U D G M E N T Basant,J The petitioner, a woman, has come to this Court with this petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce her daughter Suja.S, aged 26 years (date of birth : 05/05/194). She is educated. She holds a Diploma and has been working as a Laboratory Technician for a period of about 1½ years. She was allegedly found to be missing from 08/07/2010. The uncle of the alleged detenue had preferred a complaint and the police had registered a crime. As the alleged detenue was not traced by the police, the petitioner came to this Court with this petition on 13/7/2010. The petition was admitted on 14/7/2010. The case was posted to this date for appearance of the parties. 2. Today when the case is called, the petitioner is present. She is represented by a counsel. Along with the petitioner, her brother and son have also come to Court. W.P.(Crl) No.282/10 : 2 : 3. The 2nd respondent is present. Along with him, the alleged detenue Ms.Suja has also come to Court. As the alleged detenue comes to Court along with/in the custody of the second respondent, who is allegedly detaining her, we permitted the alleged detenue to remain alone in the chamber with no opportunity for the second respondent to influence her. We granted permission to the petitioner, her brother and son to interact with the alleged detenue. 4. After lunch recess, we interacted with the alleged detenue alone initially and later in the presence of the petitioner, her brother and son. Later, we interacted with the alleged detenue in the presence of the second respondent and the mother of the second respondent, who has come to Court along with him. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the 2nd respondent and the learned Government Pleader were also present. 5. The alleged detenue states before us categorically that she is not under any illegal confinement or detention. She was in love with the second respondent and they had decided to get married. Their relationship was not approved by the W.P.(Crl) No.282/10 : 3 : relatives of the alleged detenue. Another marriage for the alleged detenue was contemplated. It was at this stage that the alleged detenue and the second respondent decided to get married and went away. Their marriage, in accordance with the Hindu Customary rights has been solemnised on 14/7/2010 between 9.30 a.m and 9.50 a.m at the Kaithakkal Kanjikkal (Varikkolil) Devi Kshethra Seva Samithi. We are informed that steps have been taken to get the marriage registered with the Secretary of the Gramma Panchayath, Pallikkal. The certificate dated 14/7/2010 addressed to the Secretary, Gramma Panchayath by the Secretary, Kshethra Seva Samithi is produced. 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 detention or confinement. We are satisfied that she is not. We are further satisfied that she is married to the second respondent. The petitioner, her brother and son, after interactions with the alleged detenue, now state that they are now satisfied that she is not under any illegal confinement or detention and that the alleged detenue can be W.P.(Crl) No.282/10 : 4 : permitted to go along with the second respondent. They accept the fait accompli and do not want to resist the attempt of the alleged detenue and the second respondent to live together as husband and wife. 7. 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 Ms.Suja, an adult major woman, is permitted to leave the Court along with the second respondent, with whom she has already got married and his mother, as desired by the alleged detenue. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge W.P.(Crl) No.282/10 : 5 : W.P.(Crl) No.282/10 : 6 : R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 29/07/2009