IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2011 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1933 WP(Crl.).No. 453 of 2011(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SIVARAJAN, S/O. ARJUNAN CHETTIYAR, AGED 55 YEARS, VAISAKHAM HOUSE, MULLAKALATHUKAVU.P.O, THATTATHUMALA, KILIMANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.DINESH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KANNUR-670 001. 3. RURAL SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHOKKLY POLICE STATION, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 001. 5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILIMANOOR POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 6. SAJEEB.A, S/O. AHAMED, LAILA MANZIL, KAVIYOOR.P.O, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 002. 7. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, RAMAMURTHY NAGAR POLICE STATION, BANGALORE CITY, KARNATAKA. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. SUNITHA VINOD ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH FOR R-6 SMT.BINDUMOL JOSEPH FOR R-6 SRI.B.S.SYAMANTHAK FOR R-6 THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PRINCIPAL OF COLUMBIA COLLEGE OF NURSING BEFORE THE 7TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 - TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R. CRIME NO.298/2011 OF THE OFFICE OF THE 7TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED TO THE OFFICE OF 5TH RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- W.P. (Crl) No.453 of 2011-S ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Basant,J. This judgment must be read in continuation of the earlier orders passed by us in the matter from 4/10/11 resting with the order dated 25/10/11. 2. The petitioner had come to this Court with this petition on 3/10/11 with the prayer that a writ of habeas corpus may be issued to search for, trace and produce his daughter 'Saranya', an adult major woman aged 22 years (date of birth - 30/5/1989). She is a student of Nursing at Bangalore and she was allegedly found to be missing from the 1st week of September, 2011. A complaint was filed alleging that the petitioner's daughter is missing and accordingly a crime was registered as Ext.P1 before the Ramamurthy Nagar Police Station at Bangalore. The alleged detenue, the petitioner's daughter, was not traced even though the said crime was registered as early as on 11/9/11. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner came to this Court with this petition on 3/10/11. 3. On 4/10/11 this petition was posted to 10/10/11. On that W.P. (Crl) No.453 of 2011 -: 2 :- day, the alleged detenue along with the 6th respondent had appeared before Court. On that day, as agreed by all concerned, the alleged detenue was persuaded to go with her parents and accordingly she stayed with her parents till 18/10/11. She was sent back along with her parents on 18/10/11 with directions to her to appear on 25/10/11. On 25/10/11 by another order passed the alleged detenue was permitted to reside at the Santhinikethan hostel. She has been brought from Santhinikethan hostel today. 4. We interacted with the alleged detenue alone initially. Later we interacted with her in the presence of learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner and his wife are not present today. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's wife has fallen ill and has been hospitalised and that is why the petitioner and his wife have not been able to come to court today. 5. The alleged detenue advances a different version. According to her, she had informed her parents that she intends to go with the 6th respondent and get married to him. They were not able to agree to the idea of her getting married to the 6th W.P. (Crl) No.453 of 2011 -: 3 :- respondent. She had in any case made it clear to her parents when they met her at hostel and later contacted her over the telephone that she intends to go with the 6th respondent today and get married to him. 6. The alleged detenue states before us that she now wants to go with the 6th respondent and get married to him. 7. The 6th respondent has appeared before Court. He is represented by a counsel. Today his elder brother Mr. Anas has also come along with him. The 6th respondent and his brother submit that the 6th respondent is willing to marry the alleged detenue and they are willing to take her along with them. It is submitted before Court that there shall be no compulsion to get her converted to any other religion. In fact, it is submitted before us that notice has already been given to get their marriage solemnized and registered under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act. A receipt dated 20/9/11 issued by the Sub Registrar, Chokkily, is placed before Court to convince the Court that necessary arrangements have already been made to get the marriage solemnized and registered. Ever since the alleged detenue was missing - i.e., from the 1st week of September, 2011 W.P. (Crl) No.453 of 2011 -: 4 :- till the alleged detenue along with the 6th respondent appeared before Court they were living together as husband and wife with the hope to get their marriage solemnized and registered under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act in accordance with the notice already lodged before the Registrar, Chokkily, it is submitted. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and his wife would now leave the matter to the alleged detenue to take a decision as to what she should do. 9. The 6th respondent and his brother undertake before Court that if the alleged detenue is permitted to leave this Court along with them, they shall ensure that the marriage between the alleged detenue and the 6th respondent is solemnized and registered in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act and that a certificate to that effect is produced before Court on any day to be specified by this Court. 10. In a petition for issue of writ of habeas corpus, we are primarily concerned with the question whether the alleged detenue is under any illegal detention or confinement. In the facts and circumstances of this case, we are convinced that the W.P. (Crl) No.453 of 2011 -: 5 :- alleged detenue is not under any illegal confinement or detention. We note that she is an adult woman who has already attained the age of 22 years. She is an educated woman she having completed her B.Sc. Nursing Course. We respect her decisional autonomy. We are satisfied that the alleged detenue can be permitted to leave this Court in accordance with her wishes. 11. We do, in these circumstances, accept the decision of the alleged detenue that she wants to go along with the 6th respondent and get married to him. We accept the submission of the alleged detenue, the 6th respondent and his brother Mr. Anas that the marriage between the alleged detenue and the 6th respondent shall be solemnized and registered in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act. 12. In the result: (a) This petition is dismissed. (b) The alleged detenue 'Saranya' is permitted to leave this Court as desired by her along with the 6th respondent and his brother Mr. Anas. 13. As agreed by the alleged detenue, the 6th respondent and his brother Mr. Anas, we post this case to 21/11/2011 for the W.P. (Crl) No.453 of 2011 -: 6 :- alleged detenue and the 6th respondent to appear before us along with a copy of the marriage certificate to confirm that the marriage has been solemnized and registered under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act. 14. A copy of the marriage certificate shall also be produced on 21/11/11 for being furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge