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 25TH JUNE 2010 / 4TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 156 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- NARENDRAN, S/O.AADICHAN, 47 YEARS OF AGE, PARAKKADIVASAM, MALANTHADAM, ARUVAPPULAM, KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.JOHN MATHEW SRI.MANUEL KACHIRAMATTAM SMT.MERRY GEORGE RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE D.Y.S.P.,ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KONNI POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. RAJESH, PLAMTHADAM LAKASHAM VEEDU COLONY, MUTHUPEZHUNKAL PO, PLAMTHADAM, PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. SANEESH, S/O.ANAND, PUSHPAMANGALATH, MALANTHADAM, ARUVAPPULAM, PATHANAMTHITTA. ADV. SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR FOR R3 SRI.R.RANJITH FOR R3 SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== W.P.(CRL) NO. 156 OF 2010 ============================ DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE 2010 JUDGMENT Basant,J. This judgment must be read in continuation of earlier orders passed by this court in this matter resting with the order dated 14/6/2010. 2. The petitioner has come to this court with this petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus complaining that his daughter Ms.Ranjini, a minor child at that time was being illegally detained and confined by the 4th respondent in collusion with the third respondent. She was missing from 24/3/2010. A crime was registered at the Konni Police station as Crime No.252/2010. As the police did not succeed in tracing the alleged detenue, Ranjini, the petitioner came to this Court with this petition on 26/4/2010. 3. This petition was admitted by the Vacation bench on 27/4/2010. The case was posted to 4/5/2010. The minor child was traced by the police and was produced before the learned W.P.(CRL)NO.156/2010 -2- Magistrate on 1/5/2010. As the alleged detenue was a minor at that time, the learned Magistrate permitted the petitioner to take the child with him. On 4/5/2010, the child was produced before the Vacation Bench and the Vacation Bench authorised continuance of the said arrangement. 4. The case was called again after vacation on 20/5/2010. The matter was adjourned to 25/5/2010. On 25/5/2010, we issued orders and accordingly the alleged detenue returned with the petitioner. On 14/6/2010 also, we permitted the alleged detenue as agreed by her to continue residence with her parents, i.e. the petitioner and his wife. 5. The child now has attained majority on 21/5/2010. Today when the case is called, the petitioner and his wife are present along with the alleged detenue. The 4th respondent and his father Ananthan have come before this court. We interacted with the alleged detenue, Ms.Ranjini alone initially and later in the presence of her parents. Subsequently, we interacted with her in the presence of the 4th respondent, Saneesh, and his father. Later, we interacted with her in the presence of all of them. The learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the 4th respondent and the learned Government Pleader were W.P.(CRL)NO.156/2010 -3- also present. 6. The petitioner and his wife have filed separate affidavits of undertaking before this Court that the alleged detenue, Ms.Ranjini, their daughter, will not be given away in marriage by them to anyone against her will. We are happy to note that in the course of discussion/interactions with us, the parties have agreed upon certain terms. Accordingly, we allow this writ petition and issue the following directions: i) The alleged detenue, Ms.Ranjini, shall return from court today along with her parents. ii)She shall reside with her parents and shall continue/complete her education. She has passed +2 course with good marks and she intends to join B.Com degree course, it is submitted. iii)After the alleged detenue completes her B.Com course or after the expiry of a period of three years from this date, the petitioner and his wife agree that marriage between the alleged detenue, Ranjini and the 4th respondent can be performed, if both of them then desire to enter matrimony. W.P.(CRL)NO.156/2010 -4- iv) Both sides agree that all necessary steps shall be taken at the initiative of the 4th respondent to report settlement and close all the cases pending before the parties. Sd/- R. BASANT, JUDGE Sd/- M.C. HARI RANI,JUDGE ks. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE