IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS MONDAY, THE 21ST MARCH 2011 / 30TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 122 of 2011(S) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- SAMEER SHAMSUDEEN, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O.SHAMSUDEEN, RESIDING AT CHEMMAKKATTU PUTHENVEEDU, MULAMKADAKAM, THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.GOPALAKRISHNAN SRI.MANOJ RAJAGOPAL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PIN-682 031. CHATHANNOOR THROUGH PUBLIC PLROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA-682031. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARIPPALLY POLICE STATION, KOLLAM-691 574. 3. ABDUL AZEEZ, S/O.ABDUL RAHIM, PUTHUVAL VILAKOM, MUKKADA, PARIPPALLY P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 574. 4. SHAKEELA, W/O.ABDUL AZEEZ, PUTHUVAL VILAKAM, MUKKADA, PARIPPALLY P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 574. 5. MUHAMMED BASHEER, SHYLA BHAVAN, MUKKADA, PARIPPALLY P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 574. R1 & R2 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.K.BABU R3 TO R5 BY ADV. SRI.A.SHAFEEK (KAYAMKULAM) SRI.Y.A.RAHIM SRI.M.G.ANON THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPCR.122 OF 2011-S PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1.TRUE COPY OF THE MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE DATED 11.10.2010. EXT.P2.TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 2.3.2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R3A.TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 14.3.2011 SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.R3B.TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 7.3.2011 ISSUED BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, SOUTH PARAVUR IN CMP NO.1948/2011. K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(CRL) No.122 of 2011-S ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 21st day of March, 2011 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioner is the husband of the alleged detenu. Allegation of detention is made against respondents 3 to 5. 2. We have interacted with the alleged detenu more than once. We have also allowed the alleged detenu to interact with the petitioner. Today, the alleged detenu would reiterate that she does not wish to go with the petitioner and she would like to go with the father and that there is no illegal detention by respondents 3 to 5. In such circumstances, we close the Writ Petition (Criminal) without prejudice to the rights of the parties. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS