IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(Crl.).No. 537 of 2009(S)
1. SMT.SALI, AGED 49 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SP OF POLICE, KOTTAYAM.
... Respondent
2. THE SI OF POLICE,
3. THE SI OF POLICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.SACHITHANANDA PAI
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :18/12/2009
O R D E R
R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(Crl.)No.537 OF 2009
-----------------------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009
J U D G M E N T
Basant, J.
The petitioner is the mother of the alleged detenu one Sanoj
Joseph, aged 24 years. She has come to this Court with this
petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace
and produce her son, the alleged detenu. This petition was filed
on 14.12.2009. The same was admitted on 15.12.2009 and
notice was ordered to the respondents.
2. Today when the case came up for hearing, the learned
Government Pleader submits that the son of the petitioner is not
under any illegal custody. He has been arrested on the night of
11.12.2009 and taken into custody as the accused in Crime
No.802/09. Later, his arrest was recorded in Crime Nos.803/09,
805/09 and 808/09 also. He was accordingly produced before
the Judicial First Class Magistrate -I and Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Kottayam on 12.12.2009. He has been remanded to custody till
24.12.2009 and is now in judicial custody. In these
W.P.(Crl.)537/09 -2-
circumstances, this petition may now be dismissed, submits the
learned Government Pleader.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner accepts that the
son of the petitioner has already been produced before courts
and is now continuing in judicial custody. However, the learned
counsel submits that the son of the petitioner was arrested not
on 11.12.2009 as alleged by the police; but he was taken into
custody as early as on 5.12.2009. The requisite legal formalities
have not been followed in the arrest on 5.12.2009, contends the
learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. It having been satisfactorily established before us that
on the date of the petition, that is on 14.12.2009, the alleged
detenu was in judicial custody and not under any illegal custody
of the respondents, we are satisfied that no further directions
need be issued in this writ petition. We may however hasten to
observe that the dismissal of this writ petition will not in any way
fetter the rights of the petitioner and/or her son, the alleged
detenu to contend and raise appropriate grievances before
appropriate authorities that the alleged detenu was not arrested
W.P.(Crl.)537/09 -3-
as alleged by the respondents on 11.12.2009; but was arrested
much earlier on 05.12.2009. They shall also be at liberty to raise
such grievance of inadequate compliance or non-observance of
the stipulations to be respected at the time of a valid and legal
arrest and detention. Without prejudice to the said rights of the
petitioner and her son, the alleged detenu, this writ petition is, in
these circumstances dismissed.
R.BASANT, JUDGE.
M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.
dsn