IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN MONDAY, THE 5TH NOVEMBER 2007 / 14TH KARTHIKA 1929 WP(Crl.).No. 255 of 2007(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ RAVEENDRAN B., MAKKINKARA PUTHEN VEEDU, MACHINADU, PEYAD (PO), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.THALIYAL R. GOPAKUMAR SRI.N.P.PRAJEESH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. G. ASHOKAN, ASHOKA, THACHOTTUKAVU, MALAYINKEEZHU (P.O), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MALAYINKEEZHU POLICE STATION, MALAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, POLICE HEADQUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI THOMAS ABRAHAM R2 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI C.M.KAMMAPPU THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/11/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(CRL).No.225/07 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXT: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 21/10/2007. P.R.RAMAN & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(Crl)NO.255 OF 2007 -------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of November,2007 JUDGMENT Raman, J. The petitioner alleges that his son, Anil Kumar @ Ambily, was missing from 19/10/2007. On enquiry he came to know from the locality that his son fell in love with the lst respondent's daughter, Nayana, they have got married and they are residing together. However, he could not find out his son, though enquiries were made in places where he is likely to be found. A complaint made to the police is produced as Ext.P1. According to him, no effective steps are taken. 2. Pursuant to the notice issued, Anil Kumar @ Ambily as well as Nayana appeared before us. We interacted with them. Anil Kumar produced a certificate of marriage issued by the Marriage Officer under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, which shows that Anil Kumar and Nayana got married on 19/10/2007. Both of them stated that they are living together as husband and wife. We interacted with the petitioner as well. He stated that he came to know about their marriage from the public. In the light of the certificate of marriage produced and in view -2- WP(Crl).No.255/2007 of the fact that both the petitioner's son and Nayana have attained majority and in view of their submission that they are not under the illegal custody of any body, the matter is closed. P.R.RAMAN, Judge. V.K.MOHANAN, Judge. kcv.