IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(Crl.).No. 468 of 2009(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------- MATHEW PAPPAN, AGED 59, S/O.MATHEW PLANTHARAYIL, KOLADALTHUSSERY, THIRUVANVANDOOR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM VAKKANAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.PAUL ABRAHAM VAKKANAL SRI.DIJO SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE RAMANKERY POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTEND OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 3. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ERNAKULAM. 4. THANKANADAR SURESH, VATTIYAR VILLA, MUTTALAM, MARTHANDAM PO, KANNYAKUMARI DISTRICT TAMIL NADU STATE. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SMITHA SUKUMARAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------ W.P(Crl.) No.468 of 2009 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce his daughter, an adult married woman, aged 24 years with a child aged 4 years. According to the petitioner, her daughter, the alleged detenue Gini, was married and was living with her husband. A child now aged 4 years was born in that wedlock. The alleged detenue Gini had returned to the parental home for rest as she had suffered an abortion. She was found missing from 27.10.2009. Her whereabouts could not be traced. In these circumstances, the husband of the alleged detenue Gini filed a complaint before the Ramankeri Police Station and a crime was registered as Crime No.245 of 2009. Enquiry revealed that the alleged detenue Gini may have gone with the 4th respondent herein who was a Tamil worker working in the locality near the house of the petitioner. The petitioner apprehended that the 4th respondent may have taken away his W.P(Crl.) No.468 of 2009 2 daughter Gini, the alleged detenu. To the shock of the petitioner, another daughter of his received a telephone call from the alleged detenue Gini who informed her that she was with the 4th respondent and she badly wanted to return to her parental home. It was at this juncture that the petitioner in sheer helplessness rushed to this Court with this petition. 2. This petition was filed on 13.11.09. It was admitted on the same day. Notice was ordered to the respondents. The case was posted to this date. 3. Today when the case is called, the petitioner is present. The 4th respondent is present. The police have procured the presence of Gini , the alleged detenue, and has produced her before this Court. It is stated that the police had to go to Chennai in their attempt to trace the alleged detenue and the 4th respondent. Accordingly the 4th respondent has also appeared before this Court. 4. As the alleged detenue comes from the custody of the 4th respondent, we wanted to give her time to reflect, introspect and give us her voluntary and genuine response. We felt that it is necessary to permit her to remain in the Chamber without being influenced by anyone before we ascertain her response. W.P(Crl.) No.468 of 2009 3 Accordingly she was permitted to remain in the Chamber for a period of about 3 hours. The petitioner, the father of the alleged detenue, was permitted to interact with her in the meantime. 5. After lunch recess, we interacted with the alleged detenue in the Chamber. Initially we interacted with her alone. Later, we interacted with her in the presence of the petitioner and the 4th respondent. 6. The alleged detenue states before us categorically that it was a mistake on her part to have gone with the 4th respondent. She now does not want to continue with the 4th respondent. She wants to return along with the petitioner herein, her father. The 4th respondent who is personally present and is not represented by any counsel states that if the alleged detenue wants to go along with her father, the petitioner, he has absolutely no objection against the same. The alleged detenue also informs us that it is true that she had informed her sister, and the petitioner through such sister, that she wants to return to her parental home while she was residing with the 4th respondent. 7. We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that this Writ Petition can be allowed and the alleged detenue can be W.P(Crl.) No.468 of 2009 4 permitted to leave the Court along with her father, the petitioner herein, as desired by her. No other directions are necessary. We are informed that a crime has been registered and the police is investigating into the crime. Needless to say, the law must take its course and the police must ensure that proper investigation is conducted in the crime. 8. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is allowed. The alleged detenue Gini who is produced before the Court is permitted to leave the Court along with her father, the petitioner, as desired by her. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) rtr/-