IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(Crl.).No. 242 of 2009(S)
1. C.P.SACHINANDANDN, CHITTARIPOYIL HOUSE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SANJU @ VIMAL S/O. VIJAYAN,
... Respondent
2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, PALIKKAL
3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN
For Respondent :SRI. K.SIJU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :30/06/2009
O R D E R
R. BASANT &
M.C. HARI RANI, JJ.
-------------------------------------------------
W.P.(Cri) No.242 of 2009-S
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of June, 2009
JUDGMENT
Basant,J.
The petitioner has come to this Court with this writ
petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace
and produce his daughter – Ms.Chaithra, an adult major
woman, who, he apprehended, was being illegally detained by
the 1st respondent herein.
2. This writ petition was admitted on 24/6/09. Notice
was ordered to the respondents. Today, when the case is
called, the petitioner and his counsel are present. The 1st
respondent and his counsel are also present. Along with the
1st respondent, the alleged detenue Ms. Chaithra has come to
this Court.
3. As the alleged detenue comes from the custody of the
W.P.(Cri) No.242 of 2009-S
-: 2 :-
1st respondent, we permitted the alleged detenue to be alone in
the Chamber and did not grant an opportunity for any concerned
person to interact with her, other than the petitioner. The
petitioner did not, of course, avail of that opportunity. At 1.45
p.m. we interacted with the alleged detenue in the Chamber.
She stated that she has already attained the age of 20 years, she
having been born on 21/5/89. The petitioner is her father. The
1st respondent was her lover and is now her legally married
husband. Her parents did not approve of her relationship with
the 1st respondent. They did not heed to her request to permit
her to marry the 1st respondent and it is, in these circumstances,
that the alleged detenue and the 1st respondent chose to enter
matrimony. They allegedly executed an agreement of marriage
on 20/6/09. Later, they have got married in accordance with
the customary Hindu rites at Kannamangalam Vishnu Temple,
Vakkam. The 1st respondent and the alleged detenue are now
residing along with the parents of the 1st respondent at Pallikal.
4. The 1st respondent confirms that he and the alleged
detenue have now got married in accordance with the customary
rites, the marriage having been solemnised at the said temple
W.P.(Cri) No.242 of 2009-S
-: 3 :-
referred above, on 25/6/09. We are satisfied from the
submissions made by the alleged detenue and the 1st respondent
as also the copy of the registered document dated 20/6/09 and
the certificate issued by the Secretary, SNDP Branch, Pallickal,
that the petitioner and the 1st respondent are regally married
spouses.
5. The alleged detenue in response to our specific query
submits that she wants to leave the Court along with the 1st
respondent with whom she has come to Court today. The
petitioner, on the other hand, submits that he has no objection
against the alleged detenue being permitted to go with the 1st
respondent, he now having convinced himself that they are
legally married and that the alleged detenue is not under any
confinement or detention.
6. We are satisfied that no further directions are necessary.
As agreed by all concerned, this writ petition is, in these
circumstances, dismissed.
7. The alleged deteneu Ms.Chaithra is permitted to leave
this Court along with the 1st respondent as desired by her. The
copy of the agreement dated 20/6/09 and the original certificate
W.P.(Cri) No.242 of 2009-S
-: 4 :-
dated 29/6/09 placed before this Court by the 1st respondent
shall be retained in the file of this Court.
Sd/-
R. BASANT
(Judge)
Sd/-
M.C. HARI RANI
(Judge)
Nan/
//true copy//
P.S. to Judge