IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 27TH JUNE 2011 / 6TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 15947 of 2011(P) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- ASWANI N.A., AGED 20 YEARS, D/O.AJAYGOSH, NEDIYAMBATH HOUSE, P.O.EDASSERI, THALIKKULAM, PULIYAMTHURATH, CHAVAKKAD THALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, VADANAPPILLY POLICE STATION, CHAVAKKAD THALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN 680 506. 2. AJAYGOSH, NEDIYAMBATH HOUSE, P.O.EDASSERI, THALIKKULAM, PULIYAMTHURATH, CHAVAKKAD THALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN 680 506. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.M.CHARISMA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.15947/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 COPY OF THE INVITATION CARD PRINTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P2 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ************************************* W.P(C) No.15947 of 2011 -P ***************************** Dated this the 27th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. This judgment shall be read in continuation of the order dated 20th June, 2011. The petitioner, a young girl aged about 20 years has come to this Court seeking police protection against the action of the second respondent, who is compelling her to enter matrimony against her wishes with one Subin for which marriage, Ext.P1 invitation has been printed. That marriage is scheduled to take place on 10/07/2011. This petition was admitted and notice was ordered to the second respondent. The second respondent though duly served has not chosen to appear before this Court. The learned Government Pleader represents the first respondent. Though there was a submission that there is some attempt to settle the matter, the matter has not been settled still, it is admitted. W.P(C) No.15947 of 2011 -P- :2:- 2. The second respondent has not chosen to appear before this Court and report any settlement. We did in these circumstances, issued the interim order dated 20/06/2011. The following direction was issued: "There shall be an interim direction to the 1st respondent that, in the meantime, adequate protection shall be afforded to the petitioner to ensure that she is not compelled to enter matrimony before that date with any one by the 2nd respondent." 3. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, we note that the second respondent has not appeared before Court. We understand the plight of the second respondent. The learned Government Pleader submits that police have contradicted the second respondent and he has accused the police that the proposed marriage which was to take place on 10/7/2011 as per Ext.P1 invitation has now been called off. He shall not in any way compel the petitioner to get married to any person against her will. The learned Government Pleader, in these circumstances, submits that it may not strictly be necessary to issue any directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. We have considered all the relevant inputs. We find merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that in as much W.P(C) No.15947 of 2011 -P- :3:- as the second respondent has not chosen to appear before Court and make his submission directly before Court, the interim order issued on 20/6/2011 can be made absolute. 5. In the result: A) This petition is allowed. B) The interim order dated 20/6/2011 extracted above is made absolute. Sd/- R.BASANT, JUDGE Sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE krj