IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(Crl.).No. 35 of 2010(S) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JOY MATHEW, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.K.C.MATHEW RESIDING AT KOTTUNKAL HOUSE, CHALLAPPALLY P.O., EZHAMATTOOR (VIA), PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.AJEESH S.BRITE SRI.GEORGE ABRAHAM PACHAYIL SMT.DHRISYA MOHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. DY.S.P.OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 5. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, RANNY POLICE STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 6. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NAGPUR DISTRICT, MAHARASTRA. 7. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, GUTTIKHDAN POLICE STATION, NAGPUR, MAHARASTRA. WPCR.35/10 2 ADDL.8. ARUN P.S., S/O.JOY JAMES, PUTHENKANDATHIL HOUSE, KANNANPALAM VADASSERIKKARA, PATHANAMTHITTA DT. (ADDL.R8 IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DATED 25.1.2010 ON I.A.NO.1064/10) R1 TO R7 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.RAVINDRA BABU. R8 BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WPCR.35/10 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY CARD OF THE DETENUE. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PETITIONER ANDMR.ARUN. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT LODGED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------- W.P(Crl).No.35 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J. The petitioner's daughter, stated to be a minor, is allegedly missing. The 8th respondent is the son of the sister-in-law of the petitioner. It appears that there was an earlier incident that led to certain police involvement and allegedly an agreement. It was thereafter that the petitioner's daughter again went missing. The petitioner with family was then in Nagpur. The petitioner complained to the Nagpur police. Later, on the assumption that the petitioner's daughter is in the custody of the 8th respondent and has been brought down to Pathanamthitta, the petitioner came down and lodged a complaint with the Pathanamthitta police. The 8th respondent appeared through counsel and filed counter affidavit. Thereafter, the petitioner's father allegedly WPCR.35/10 2 get a communication from the 8th respondent evidencing that he has left the station. It appears that the alleged detenue and the 8th respondent are uterine relatives and therefore, stated to be within the prohibited degree of marriage. What ever be, we are inclined to think that the petitioner would have been well advised to prosecute remedies with the Nagpur police and the Nagpur courts if it becomes necessary. But we are persuaded to require the Pathanamthitta police under the command of the third respondent Superintendent to look into the grievances of the petitioner and have a comprehensive enquiry/investigation conducted at that level and if the alleged detenue and the 8th respondent are not traceable, transmit a report to the competent police station of the 7th respondent through the 6th respondent so that the petitioner can further seek relief from that end. Let the Kerala Police do the needful in terms of the aforesaid direction and send a report to the 6th respondent within a period of one month. This writ petition is ordered accordingly, WPCR.35/10 3 directing that the petitioner will be entitled to seek appropriate relief in the proper court in Nagpur in Maharashtra and also police authorities of that State. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- P.S.GOPINATHAN, Judge. kkb.22/02.