IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 438 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ANOOP P.R., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.RAVI, PALAMOOTTIL, PUNTHALA THAZHAM, VENMONY, CHENGANNUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.N.ASHOK KUMAR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. GOPI P.D, NEETHUNIVAS, PUNTHALA THAZHAM, VENMONI,PUNTHALA P.O., CHENGANNUR-690 521. 2. MANI, W/O.GOPI, NEETHUNIVAS, OF -DO-. 3. LATHA, NEETHU NIVAS, OF -DO-. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VENMONY POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 5. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA. 6. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.J.MUHAMMED ANZAR ADV. SRI.V.MANOJ KUMAR FOR R1 TO 3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(Crl) No.438 of 2010 ***************************** Dated this the 15th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce Nisha Gopi, a young woman, aged above 18 years (date of birth - 28.05.1992). She had done her Plus Two course. She had later joined the I.T.I Course. According to the petitioner, the petitioner and the alleged detenue are in love. In April, 2010, the alleged detenue had come to the house of the petitioner. She had refused to return. She was produced by the police before the Magistrate. She wanted to go with the petitioner. But as she had not completed the age of 18 years as per her school records, she was sent along with the 3rd respondent, her paternal aunt. Subsequently the alleged detenue was taken away to some unknown destination. The petitioner was not permitted to contact the alleged detenue. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner came to Court with this petition on 08.11.2010. According to the petitioner, the alleged detenue Nisha Gopi is under the illegal confinement or detention of respondents 1 to 3. W.P(Crl) No.438 of 2010 2 2. This petition was admitted on 09.11.2010. It was posted to this date for appearance of the respondents. 3. Today when the case is called, the petitioner is present. He is represented by his counsel. Both his parents have come to Court. 4. Respondents 1 to 3 have come before Court. They are represented by a counsel. Along with them, the alleged detenue has also come to Court. 5. As the alleged detenue comes to court along with/in the custody of respondents 1 to 3, we permitted her to remain alone in the Chamber, without opportunity for any of the parties to influence her. In response to a specific query by this Court, the alleged detenue stated that she does not want to interact with the petitioner. 6. After the lunch recess, we interacted with the alleged detenue alone initially and later in the presence of the petitioner. Subsequently we interacted with them in the presence of the parents of the petitioner and the parents of the alleged detenue. The learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3 and the learned Government Pleader were also present. W.P(Crl) No.438 of 2010 3 7. The alleged detenue stated before us that she wants to return along with her parents. She is presently employed in an establishment. She is not under any illegal confinement or detention. 8. 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 confinement or detention. We are satisfied from our interactions that the alleged detenue is not under any illegal confinement or detention. We are satisfied that she speaks voluntarily and not under any pressure or intimidation. She wants to leave the Court with her parents and does not want to leave with the petitioner. We respect her decisional autonomy. Notwithstanding the fact that on an earlier occasion she had wanted to go along with the petitioner, her present statement, we are satisfied, can safely be accepted and she can be permitted to return along with her parents. The alleged detenue states before us that her real date of birth is 01.02.1992, though her date of birth in the school certificate is 28.05.1992. Be that as it may, we do not intend to enter into any other controversies. Suffice it to say that, we are satisfied that the alleged detenue is not under any illegal confinement or W.P(Crl) No.438 of 2010 4 detention now and she can now be permitted to leave the Court along with her parents as desired by her. 9. In the result: a) This Writ Petition is dismissed; b) The alleged detenue Nisha Gopi, aged above 18 years, is permitted to leave the Court along with her parents - respondents 1 and 2. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/