IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH JUNE 2011 / 25TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(Crl.).No. 283 of 2011(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ANTONY, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.STANCILIAS, PADATHALAVILAKATHU VEEDU R.C.STREET, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT PIN 695 121. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.ANIL KUMAR SRI.AJITH MURALI RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE SUPERINTENDENT POLICE (RURAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT PIN 695 001. 2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE OFFICE OF THE C.I OF POLICE, NEYYATTINKARA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT PIN 695 121. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE NEYYATTINKARA POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT PIN 695 121. 4. GEORGE MORAIS, DEVATHARU OORUTTUKALA, NEYYATTINKARA NOW RESIDING AT EYTHUKONDAKANI, AMARAVILA PO, DHANUVACHAPURAM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT PIN 695 122.. GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SHRI C M KAMAPPU FOR R1-4 ADV. SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. FOR R4 SRI.G.P.SHINOD FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF THE MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 : A TRUE COPY OF THE MARRIAGE INVITATION LETTER OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P3 ; A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT.6.6.11 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL // TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE K. M. JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS JJ., - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(Crl.) No.283 of 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph J., The petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus for the production of the his wife, Jisha George. 2. Briefly put the case of the petitioner is as follows. The petitioner and the 4th respondent are belonging to Latin-Catholic Christian Community. The petitioner and the fourth respondent's daughter loved each other and they got married at Sreenarayana Gurumandiram, Marayamuttom on 20.5.2011. The certificate evidencing the marriage is produced. The allegation of detention is made against the fourth respondent, who is the father of the alleged detenue. W.P.(Crl.) No.283 of 2011 :2: 3. The alleged detenue was present. The petitioner was also present. We interacted with both of them. We asked the alleged detenue whether there is any illegal detention. She says that there is no illegal detention. She would further say that she does not want to go with the petitioner and that she wants to go with her father. Thereafter, we permitted the alleged detenue to interact with the petitioner for some time in the Court. After the interactions, we called the case and the detenue would say that she does not like to go with the petitioner and that she wants to go with her father. 4. We are of the view that the petitioner has not established the case of illegal detention. We close the Writ Petition allowing the alleged detenue to go with her father. 5. Learned counsel for the fourth respondent submits that some certificates of the alleged detenue are with the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner after getting instructions from his client would submit that the certificates will be handed back to the W.P.(Crl.) No.283 of 2011 :3: counsel for the fourth respondent, within two weeks from today. We record the same. K.M.JOSEPH, (JUDGE) M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, (JUDGE) dl/