IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2009 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(Crl.).No. 105 of 2009(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------- SARALADEVI PILLAI, AGED 50, W/O. GANGADHARAN, R/AT SARALA BHAVAN, KURAMBALA, PANDALAM, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. MS.T.S.MAYA (THIYADIL) RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PANDALAM POLICE STATION, PANDALAM. 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PANDALAM POLICE STATION, PANDALAM. 3. SUBASH, AGED ABOUT 25, S/O. KOCHUKUNJU, R/AT MANNIL THEKKETHIL VEEDU, KANAKAVILASAM, KURUMBALA THEKKU.P.O, ADOOR TALUK. 4. KOCHUKUNJU AGED ABOUT 60, S/O. SANKARAN, R/AT MANNIL THEKKETHIL VEEDU, KANAKAVILASAM, KURUMBALA THEKKU.P.O, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. R1 AND R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. S.U. NAZAR R3 AND R4 BY ADV. MR. SUNIL JACOB JOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(Crl.) 105 of 2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE A. K. BASHEER & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P. (Crl.) No. 105 of 2009 - S ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 17th day of March, 2009. JUDGMENT Basheer, J: Ms. Yamuna Devi, the alleged detenu has appeared before court today along with respondent No.3, who she claims is her husband. According to Ms. Yamuna Devi and respondent No.3, they had got married as per Hindu vedic rites and rituals at Sri. Adarsh Vivah Karyalaya, Mumbai on March 7, 2009. It is further stated by them that prior to this formal ceremony, respondent No.3 had tied a thali in accordance with customary rites at Ochira Parabrahmam temple on March 2, 2009. 2. Detenu is a Nair whereas respondent No.3 belongs to Kuruva community. According to them, they have been in love since the last three years. Ms. Yamuna Devi asserts and insists that she wants to live with her husband. She further asserts that she is not under any illegal confinement or detention as alleged by the petitioner, who is none other than her mother. 3. Ms. Yamuna Devi is aged 25 years and she is a graduate. She is also attending computer classes and coaching for examination in Co-operative Training course. Respondent No.3 is stated to be employed in a private company in Gujarath. He is also a graduate and aged 25 years. W.P.(Crl.) 105 of 2009 2 4. We have interacted with the parents of the detenu. They stated that they are prepared to take their daughter along with them, if she is prepared to do so. But, as indicated above, Ms. Yamuna Devi wants to go and live with respondent No.3. 5. Keeping in view all the attendant facts and circumstances, we are satisfied that Ms. Yamuna Devi has to be allowed to take her own decision. We do so. The writ petition is closed. A.K. BASHEER, JUDGE P.BHAVADASAN, JUDGE kmd.