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 21ST MAY 2010 / 31ST VAISAKHA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 168 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SANTHAKUMARI PONNAYYAN, W/O.PONNAYYAN, VALIYAVILA VEEDU, KULATHOOR, UCHAKKADA P.O., NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.D.VIJAYAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (LAW & ORDER) POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POZHIYOOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MEHARALI POLICE STATION. 6. A.MRITHUNJAYA KUMAR SHAHA @ MITHU, S/O.APHAYAKANTH SHAHA, 1080 C/1, 2ND FLOOR, WARD NO.1, MEHARALI, NEW DELHI. 7. A.AJAYAKUMAR SHAHA, S/O.APHAYAKANTH SHAHA, 1080 C/1, 2ND FLOOR, WARD NO.1, MEHARALI, NEW DELHI. 8. APHAYAKANTH SHAHA, 1080 C/1, 2ND FLOOR, WARD NO.1, MEHARALI, NEW DELHI. WP(Crl.).No. 168 of 2010(S) 2 9. PUSHPALAKSHMY SHAHA, W/O.APHAYAKANTH SHAHA, 1080 C/1, 2ND FLOOR, WARD NO.1, MEHARALI, NEW DELHI. BY GOVT.PLEADER SHRI C.M.KAMMAPPU FOR R1 TO R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI,J J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(CRL.) No. 168 of 2010 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce her daughter Anupama Devi, aged 20 years (date of birth:24.4.1990). It is her apprehension that the alleged detenue has been detained illegally by respondents 6 to 9. 2. This petition was filed on 11.5.2010. The same was admitted on 13.5.2010. Notice was ordered to the respondents. The case was posted to this date. 3. Today, when the case is called, the petitioner is present along with her counsel. The alleged detenue and the 6th respondent have been brought to Court. They are not represented by any counsel. As the alleged detenue comes from the custody of/along with the 6th respondent, we permitted the alleged detenue to remain alone in the Chamber until we met her after lunch recess. Her mother was permitted to interact with her. No other person was permitted to be present in the course of the interactions between the mother and the daughter. WPCR.168/10 2 4. After lunch, we met the alleged detenue initially alone. Later, we met her in the presence of her mother, the petitioner. Later, we interacted with her in the presence of the 6th respondent also. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader were also present. 5. The alleged detenue stated before us categorically that she is not under any illegal detention or confinement. She is an adult major woman, she having been born on 24.4.1990. She has got married to the 6th respondent in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act. She has produced before us a certificate dated 24.6.2009 to confirm that such marriage between the alleged detenue and the 6th respondent has taken place in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act. She asserts that she is not under any illegal confinement or detention and that she wants to return along with her husband, the 6th respondent. 6. In the course of our interactions with the petitioner, the petitioner now accepts that the 6th respondent and the alleged detenue are married to each other. She does not dispute that fact now. However, she asserts that in the interest of continued education of the alleged detenue it will be better for WPCR.168/10 3 her to remain in Kerala and join any professional college. She states that she is willing to meet the expenses for the same if the alleged detenue would return to Kerala and live with her. The alleged detenue is not willing for that course. The alleged detenue states that she is preparing for the entrance examination at Delhi and has to appear for the examination within a fortnight. She will try to secure admission for the professional course in Delhi and get educated there, she asserts. 7. The 6th respondent submits that he is willing to speak to the parents of the alleged detenue and settle all outstanding differences of opinion. He states that he would like to speak to the parents of the alleged detenue together. According to him, no useful purpose will be served by talking to the petitioner, the mother of the detenue alone. If his father-in-law and mother-in- law are willing to talk to him, he is willing to speak to them and settle all their outstanding disputes. At any time they can speak to him at Delhi, he submits. 8. The petitioner has another request. She requests that opportunity may be given to the parents to get the marriage celebrated in the presence of relatives and friends to secure societal acceptance and respectability. Parties are not able to WPCR.168/10 4 agree on the modalities. 9. In a petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus, we are primarily concerned only with the question whether the alleged detenue is under any illegal detention or confinement. We are satisfied that she is not. Parties have several problems between them. They must try to work out and residue the same harmoniously by discussions directly or in the presence of well wishers. We are satisfied that there is no reason for this Court to allow this Writ Petition or issue any further directions therein. We repeat that the parties appear to be having problems and they would be advised to speak to each other directly or through well wishers to settle their outstanding disputes. 10. In the result, this Writ Petition is dismissed. The original of the certificate of marriage is returned to the alleged detenue. She has furnished a copy thereof to the petitioner to satisfy her that a legal marriage has taken place between the alleged detenue and the 6th respondent. She is permitted to leave the Court with the 6th respondent as desired by her. Sd/-(R. BASANT, JUDGE) dsn Sd/- (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)