IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2011 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(Crl.).No. 559 of 2011(S) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ANOOP K.K., S/O.KESAVAN, AGED 28 YEARS, KANNAMANGALATH HOUSE, AMIYOOR P.O., PIN-679 303, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.MANZOOR ALI SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR RESPONDENTS: 1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679 303. 2. MURALEEDHARAN, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, PADMINI NIVAS, AMIYOOR P.O., PIN-679 303, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. PADMINI, W/O. MURALEEDHARAN, AGED 52 YEARS, PADMINI NIVAS, AMIYOOR P.O., PIN-679 303, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. R1 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.SHIBU JOSEPH & ADGP SRI.TOM HOSE PADINJAREKKARA THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN WPCR 559/2011 EXT. P1 A COPY OF THE SCHOOL CERTIFICATE OF THE DETENUE EXT. P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT. NIL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R1 /TRUE COPY/ Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan & C.T.Ravikumar, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------- W.P.(Crl.)No.559 of 2011 S ------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of December, 2011 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan J. Read order dated 01.12.2011. The Civil Police Officer, who obtained the statement of the alleged detenue, is present today. The alleged detenue's father is also present. The Civil Police Officer, who interacted with the alleged detenue following the earlier order, is also present. 2. We find that the alleged detenue is quite founded and well oriented. She is a graduate. She wanted to interact with the petitioner. Her statement was vouchsafed with the pleadings in the writ petition. We, therefore, permitted the alleged detenue to interact with the petitioner. After the interaction about half an hour, she states that she may be permitted to go with the petitioner. We see that she is WPCR 559/2011 2 adamant and certain. There is no reason for us to direct her to go back with her father. We, therefore, interacted with her father, who is the second respondent herein. He candidly stated that having regard to the different circumstances, financial, social, educational, etc., the parents of the alleged detenue would not accept the alliance between her and the petitioner. 3. With the aforesaid, we are of the view that there is no reason for us to detain the alleged detenue. We record the statement in paragraph 3 of the writ petition that petitioner and the alleged detenue, namely, Deepa, aged 21 years, had decided to undergo a customary marriage and also to register the marriage in terms of the Special Marriage Act. We see the said submission in paragraph 2 of the statement also. Deepa agrees to the said course. Petitioner assures before this Court that this would be done. WPCR 559/2011 3 4. Under such circumstances, we let the alleged detenue Deepa to go with the petitioner and release her from the police surveillance. Petitioner and Deepa may have a customary marriage, however, that they will have to register the marriage in terms of the Special Marriage Act. An authenticated copy of the marriage certificate shall be produced before the Registrar General of this Court without fail within a period of two months from now. A similar authenticated copy of the same shall also be forwarded by the petitioner to the second respondent. Writ petition is ordered accordingly. (Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, Judge) (C.T.Ravikumar, Judge) tkv