IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS SATURDAY, THE 30TH JANUARY 2010 / 10TH MAGHA 1931 WP(Crl.).No. 41 of 2010(S) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- NANDAKUMAR S.,AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.LATE SUKUMARAN NAIR, ANUGRAHA, KONNI P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. D.Y.S.P.,ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 3. S.I.OF POLICE, KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 4. SONY SASEENDRAN, S/O. SASEENDRAN, RESHMI VILASAM, MANGARAM, KONNI, MANGARAM P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA. 5. SASEENDRAN, S/O.NANU, RESHMI VILASAM, MANGARAM,KONNI, MANGARAM P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA. 6. MRS. MANJU, RAJ BHAVAN, KALANJOOR, KALANJOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SUKUMARAN. R4 TO R6 BY ADV.SRI.K.R.VINOD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPCR.41/2010 APPENDIX: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1.COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.63/2010. K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(Crl.) No.41 of 2010-S ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 30th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. The prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to produce the body of the petitioner's daughter Parwathy Nandan before this Court and set her free. 2. The petitioner is the father of one Parvathy Nandan. According to him, his daughter is being detained by respondents 4 to 6. The 5th respondent is the father of the 4th respondent and the 6th respondent is the aunt of the 4th respondent. It is stated that the petitioner dropped Parvathy in front of her college on 25.1.2010. It is also stated that the petitioner's wife received a telephone call from Parvathy and 4th respondent. They claimed that they were married. It is stated that from the tone of Parwathy petitioner's wife understood that she is not a free person when the call is made as she was speaking as dictated by some one else against her wish. It is stated that the petitioner reported the matter in writing to the 3rd respondent. Ext.P1 is the copy of FIR. It is the case of the petitioner that Parvathy was WP (Crl) 41/2010 -2- forcefully and unlawfully taken away by the 4th respondent. 3. The alleged detenu was produced before us. We interacted with her. We also interacted with the petitioner and his wife. Besides them we interacted with the 4th respondent. We also heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel for the 4th respondent, learned counsel for respondents 5 and 6 and also the learned Government Pleader. The detenu is aged 22 years and she is doing Second year M.Sc. (Information Technology). The alleged detenu would submit that she is not under any illegal detention and that she went on her own. It is also stated that they got married. Pursuant to the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the detenu may be sent to a hostel we ascertained the wish of the alleged detenu in this regard. She expressed her disinclination to go. In the circumstances of the case we we need not permit the petitioner to pursue the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition fails, and it is dismissed. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS