IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 2ND DECEMBER 2011 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(Crl.).No. 544 of 2011(S) ------------------------------- PETITIONER: V. ARUN, AGED 24, S/O.VIJAYAN, PUNNATHATA, THIRUMULLAVARAM, KOLLAM - NOW RESIDING AT THARAMEL VADAKKATHIL, THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM) SRI.PRASANTH M.P RESPONDENTS: 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOLLAM WEST POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-690 501. 2. CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, KOLLAM, PIN-690 501. 3. DR.HARIDAS,HARISREE, VISHNATHKAVU NAGAR, THIRUMULLAVARAM, KOLLAM, PIN-690 513. 4. DR.JAYASREE, W/O.DR. HARIDAS, HARISREE, VISHNATHKAVU NAGAR, THIRUMULLAVARAM, KOLLAM, PIN-690 513. 5. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO HOME, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.R.PADMARAJ FOR R1, R2 & R5 ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL FOR R3 & R4 SRI.T.PRASAD FOR R3 & R4 SRI.SAIJU S. FOR R3 & R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WPCR 544/2011 EXT. P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE TEMPLE EVIDENCING THE SOLEMNIZATION OF THE MARRIAGE AT THE TEMPLE EXT.P1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED FROM SREE DURGA DEVI TEMPLE EXT. P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED FROM THE SNDP BRANCH, KOZHIKODU, KARUNAGAPPALLY EXT. P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH /TRUE COPY/ Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan & C.T.Ravikumar, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(Crl.)No.544 of 2011 S ------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan J. Petitioner filed this writ petition alleging that his wife Arathi Haridas is illegally detained by respondents 3 and 4. They are her parents. His allegation is that on 22.11.2011 he and Arathi married. He has produced Exhibits P1, P1(a), P2 and P3 to evidence his contention as regards the marriage. Respondents 3 and 4 appeared on notice and pleaded through counter affidavit that Arathi was produced before Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Kollam, who required her admission to the hospital for evaluation of her mental status. It appears that third respondent, the father of Arathi, is a doctor working in the District Hospital, WPCR 544/2011 2 Kollam. The hospital authorities, therefore, obviously, to exclude any allegation in that regard, referred Arathi for consideration by the Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. A team in the Medical College Hospital evaluated her and she was admitted on 25.11.2011. Therefore, we called for an interim report from the authorities of Medical College Hospital, Thiruvananthapuram. We have the interim report faxed down on psychiatric evaluation of Arathi. The Professor of Psychiatry reported that she was co-operative and communicative. Her talk was relevant and coherent. There was no evidence of delusions or hallucinations. Her mood was depressed and she was frequently tearful. She appeared to be oriented in time, place and person and there was no evidence of memory impairment. The hospital authorities needed one more week for continued observation and evaluation for submitting the final report. WPCR 544/2011 3 2. When we read that interim report, we thought it appropriate to have the statement of Arathi recorded through a Judicial Magistrate. We accordingly required Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Thiruvananthapuram to visit Arathi in the Department of Psychiatry, Medical College Hospital and record her statement. Her statement was recorded and faxed down immediately to this Court along with a report of the Judicial First Class Magistrate. We have gone through her statement. It disclosed clear and coherent ideas of her specific views touching her affairs. It also contained the statement regarding the petitioner, her relationship with him and about her parents. We therefore, came to the view that nothing prevents her transit from Thiruvananthapuram to Kochi to appear before us in this proceedings. We, therefore, ordered her production today. 3. Arathi was present before us this morning. She came in a car accompanied by woman police constables WPCR 544/2011 4 without uniform. When she came here, we saw that she was tired even at the first look. We, therefore, let her relax in the Chambers of one among us and was taken care of properly. We spoke to her before lunch quite elaborately. Her statements then were concurrent with the views that she gave to the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate. Yet, we thought that she was not opening up completely and she was under a sort of unhappiness over the entire episode. We wanted to persuade her to come out more clearly. We, therefore, gave her the company of some of the lady officers of the High Court, who took her for lunch in the court premises to the exclusion of the parents, the petitioner and other parties. Thereafter, she came back. We found that her emotional level had improved tremendously. She had also thereafter interacted with us in Chambers more sufficiently and specifically touching different aspects of her life. We see that, though from the details that were available to the WPCR 544/2011 5 Department of Psychiatry there were features suggestive of immaturity, impulsivity and easy suggestibility in her, on direct interaction, we find that she is well oriented and is capable of taking decisions of herself. The situation created to her is nothing but a fall out of different factors touching certain realities with reference to the parents of Arathi, petitioner and his family. The socio economic differences, communal differences, etc. would have essentially catapulted into a quick marriage after Arathi attained the age of 18. Neither her parents nor the parents of the petitioner had attended the marriage. We have also interacted with the parents of the petitioner and Arathi's parents. We had their inputs when we had the interaction with them in the post lunch session in Chambers. 4. With all the aforesaid, we find a consistent stand for Arathi, right from the statement given to the Judicial First Class Magistrate down to the last among the discussions we WPCR 544/2011 6 had with her, that she would go with her parents, but she does not want to lose the petitioner whom she has married. She also spoke specifically about this. She and petitioner were permitted to have a close door interaction in our Chambers for more than one hour. There appears to be a great deal of apprehension in the mind of the petitioner as to the consequences that they may have to face if Arathi were allowed to go with her parents. Yet, we find that Arathi desires to go with her parents as of now with the firm option of her requirement to go with the petitioner, her husband, in due course. She also cannot be denied access to the petitioner for contacting over telephone. 5. Under the aforesaid circumstances and taking all the relevant factors into consideration, including sufficient meeting in Chambers, we issue the following directions: WPCR 544/2011 7 1. Arathi, the alleged detenue, would go now as a free person of her own choice with her parents. 2. Recording her statement that she is married to the petitioner, we order respondents 3 and 4 to provide facility to Arathi to communicate with the petitioner between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. on any day in the residential telephone of respondents 3 and 4. 3. We also indicate that respondents 3 and 4 shall not in any manner create situation of any mode of harassment to Arathi. We also put on record the apprehension that there is threat held out by respondents 3 and 4 and their men to physically harm the petitioner. We record this also as a warning that no such incident shall be caused. WPCR 544/2011 8 4. With this, we further clarify that petitioner and Arathi could have access to the 24 hour Helpline No. 9846700100 of Kerala Legal Services Authority. 5. Any complaint by the petitioner or on behalf of Arathi regarding violation of any of the aforesaid conditions shall be promptly attended to by the second respondent, the District Police Chief, Kollam. We are clear in our mind that Arathi is now coherent. We have also discussed with Arathi whether she personally prefers a re-admission to any hospital. She never wanted a re-admission to any hospital. We are clear in our mind that we have to accept her view that she does not need any admission to the hospital for further evaluation. She would, WPCR 544/2011 9 therefore, go with her parents. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Since Arathi, who was brought to court with police escort, has joined her parents on the basis of this judgment, we release the police cover. Incorporate the statement and report faxed down by Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Thiruvananthapuram. (Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge) (C.T.Ravikumar, Judge) tkv