IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH OCTOBER 2008 / 7TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 31738 of 2008(C) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ MUHAMMED T.P., S/O. AHAMMED, UDUMPUMTHALA P.O., SOUTH TRIKARIPPUR VILLAGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHANDERA POLICE STATION, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. (CRIME NO.186/08 OF CHANDERA POLICE STATION) 3. EZHOTH VEETTIL RAMACHANDRAN S/O. NARAYANAN, VADASSERI, KANKOLE P.O., PAYYANUR VIA KANNUR DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. GIKKU JACOB FOR R1 & R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/10/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- W.P.C.No.31738 of 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of October 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the father of a girl who was allegedly found to be missing from 04/06/2008. The petitioner filed a petition before the police and the same was registered as crime No.186/2008 under the caption “man missing”. Investigation commenced. In the course of investigation, the missing girl was traced. She was produced before the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate, when the child was produced on 14/6/2008, took note of the S.S.L.C book produced by the child which shows that she was born on 12/5/1990 and hence not a minor on the date on which the alleged offence was committed. Accordingly she was permitted to go with the third respondent one Ramachadran with whom the girl was residing allegedly on her own free will. 2. The petitioner later came before this court and filed W.P.(Crl.) 252/08 complaining about the alleged illegal detention of the petitioner's daughter by the third respondent. That petition was disposed of by Ext.P5. The petitioner raised a contention that as a matter of fact, the child was not born on W.P.C.No.31738/08 2 12/5/1990 as shown in the school records. But she was actually born on 28/11/1990 as per the birth register maintained by the local authority. The Division Bench of this court dismissed the said writ petition by judgment dated 29/7/2008 as per Ext.P5 order taking the view that it is not necessary in such proceedings to delve deeper into the question as to which of the two certificates represent the correct date of birth. Of course, it was observed that the order of the learned Magistrate dated 14/6/2008 permitting the petitioner's daughter to go with the third respondent can be challenged in accordance with law. 3. Accordingly, the petitioner has come before this court. He contends that the order dated 14/6/2008 is incorrect and wrong inasmuch as reliance was placed on the incorrect details available in the S.S.L.C book. Production of the birth register must have been insisted by the court to ascertain the correct date of birth, contends the counsel. 4. I am satisfied on the basis of the materials placed before the learned Magistrate that the learned Magistrate was perfectly justified in passing the impugned order dated 14/6/2008. Of course, it is for the petitioner to pursue the W.P.C.No.31738/08 3 complaint filed by him before the police and request the police to take further action on the allegation that the offence of kidnapping has been committed by the third respondent in allegedly taking away the daughter of the petitioner. The petitioner can certainly contend before the police that proceedings are not liable to be dropped and further action must be taken on the complaint filed by him. The petitioner can approach the learned Magistrate also seeking further directions for proper investigation and disposal of crime No.186/2008 of Chandera police station. The impugned order, which is only an order relating to interim arrangements for the custody of the daughter of the petitioner, I am satisfied, is not liable to be disturbed now as the said order is perfectly justified by the materials available before the court which passed the order. 5. With the above observations, this petition is dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr W.P.C.No.31738/08 4 W.P.C.No.31738/08 5 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.CNo. ORDER 21ST DAY OF MAY2007