High Court Kerala High Court

K. Ramachandran Nair vs The Superintendent Of Police on 17 November, 2009

Kerala High Court
K. Ramachandran Nair vs The Superintendent Of Police on 17 November, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(Crl.).No. 465 of 2009(S)


1. K. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM.
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,

4. SAJEESH R.K., S/O. SADANANTHAN,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.V.RAJA

                For Respondent  :SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI

 Dated :17/11/2009

 O R D E R
             R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
                     * * * * * * * * * * * * *
                     W.P.(Crl).No.465 of 2009
                    ----------------------------------------
           Dated this the 17th day of November 2009


                          J U D G M E N T

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 Meera Lekshmi, aged above 19 years, who, the

petitioner apprehended, was under the illegal custody and

detention of the 4th respondent. The daughter of the petitioner

Meera Lekshmi is aged above 19 years – she having been born on

10/09/1990. She is a student of Sree Budha Engineering

College, Nooranadu. She is now in the third semester class. She

was residing near her college as a paying guest and she was

allegedly found to be missing from 10/11/2009. On coming to

know that his daughter is missing from 10/11/2009, the

petitioner had rushed to this court with this petition which was

filed on 11/11/2009.

2. This petition was admitted on 12/11/2009 and notice

was issued to the respondents.

W.P.Crl No.465/09 2

3. Today when the case is called, the petitioner and his

wife are present. The learned counsel for the petitioner is also

present. 4th respondent has entered appearance. He is

represented by a counsel. Along with him, his paternal uncle

and his wife, have also come to court. The alleged detenue has

also come to court along with the 4th respondent.

4. As the alleged detenu comes from the custody of the

4th respondent and his relatives, we wanted to ensure that she

was permitted to remain alone before her response was

ascertained. She was thus sent to the chamber and permitted to

be alone. We permitted the petitioner, his wife and the elder

brother of the alleged detenue to interact with the alleged

detenue while she was in the chamber.

5. After lunch recess, we interacted with the parties in

the chamber. Initially, we interacted with the alleged detenue.

Thereafter, we interacted with her in the presence of her parents

and the learned counsel for the petitioner. Subsequently, we

interacted with the 4th respondent in the presence of his counsel

as also his uncle and his wife.

6. Our interactions confirm that the alleged detenue

Meera Lekshmi, an adult major woman, is not under illegal

W.P.Crl No.465/09 3

confinement or detention of anyone. She asserted before us that

she was in love with the 4th respondent and that she had

voluntarily proceeded to join him. It is further submitted that

the alleged detenue and the 4th respondent have now got married

in accordance with the customary religious rites and ceremonies

on 11/11/2009. The marriage took place at Sree Parameswara

Parvathy Temple, Pinarayi. The marriage has been registered at

the Pinarayi Gramma Panchayat and a certificate issued by the

Secretary and Registrar of Marriage, Pinarayi Gramma

Panchayat has been produced.

7. We requested the learned counsel, who appeared for

the parties, to explore the possibilities of a harmonious

settlement. We interacted with all parties and their counsel in

the chamber. We are happy to note that at the end of the

discussion, parties appear to be moving towards a harmonious

settlement of all their disputes.

8. The petitioner and his wife now submit that they are

satisfied that the alleged detenue is not under illegal detention

or confinement. They submit that they accept the marriage

between the alleged detenue and the 4th respondent and shall be

taking the necessary steps at the earliest to ensure that there is

W.P.Crl No.465/09 4

meeting of minds and harmony between the two families. The 4th

respondent and his paternal uncle also reciprocated the same

sentiments. The 4th respondent, in response to a specific query

by this court – sharing the anxiety of the parents, submits that

necessary steps shall be taken to ensure that the alleged detenue

continues her Engineering course at an appropriate venue to be

decided shortly.

9. We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that there is

no element of illegal confinement or detention and that the

alleged detenue has joined the 4th respondent voluntarily in

accordance with her free will and desire. We are satisfied that

no further directions are necessary in this writ petition.

10. This writ petition is accordingly dismissed. A copy of

the marriage certificate is handed over by the learned counsel

for the 4th respondent to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

The original certificate is returned to the 4th respondent.




                                             (R.BASANT, JUDGE)



                                      (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)
jsr  // True Copy//        PA to Judge

W.P.Crl No.465/09    5

W.P.Crl No.465/09    6

W.P.Crl No.465/09    7




                      R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.




                                       .No. of 200




                              ORDER/JUDGMENT




                                      29/07/2009