IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(Crl.).No. 125 of 2009(S)
1. SRI.SUDHAKARAN.J., S/O.JANARDHANAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
3. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
4. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
5. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
6. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
7. SRI.BIJU, BIJU VILASOM,
8. SMT.VILASINI, BIJU VILASOM,
9. SMT.BINDU, BIJU VILASOM,
10. SMT.KALI, BIJU VILASOM,
For Petitioner :SRI.C.UNNIKRISHNAN (KOLLAM)
For Respondent :SRI.M.DINESH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :23/05/2009
O R D E R
R.BASANT &
M.C.HARIRANI, JJ.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
W.P.(Crl).No.125 of 2009
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of May 2009
J U D G M E N T
BASANT,J
The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226
of the Constitution of India for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to
trace and produce his daughter Sumitha aged 26 years. The
marriage of Sumitha with the 7th respondent was solemnised on
14/12/2008. She was at the matrimonial home from where she
was allegedly found to be missing from 03/03/2009. As the
petitioner apprehended foul play at the matrimonial home, he
had approached this court with this writ petition to enable him to
trace and secure the presence of his daughter.
2. This writ petition was admitted to file on 22/3/2009.
The daughter of the petitioner could not be traced till
07/04/2009 and thereafter the case was posted to this date.
Today, the police have been able to trace the petitioner’s
daughter Sumitha and she has been produced before court. It is
submitted that she was earlier produced before the learned
Magistrate having jurisdiction. The alleged detenu Sumitha
W.P.(Crl)No.125/09 2
states that she had gone to Idukki from her matrimonial home to
join a beautician course on her own. She is not under
confinement and she has no grievance or complaint that she is
detained or confined against her will or desire by anyone. In
response to a specific query by this court she submits that she
would now like to go with her father, the petitioner herein.
3. We are satisfied that the alleged detenu Sumitha is
not under confinement or illegal detention. We are satisfied that
no further directions are necessary in this writ petition.
4. This writ petition is accordingly dismissed. The
alleged detenu is permitted to leave the court with the
petitioner, her father as desired by her.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
(M.C.HARIRANI, JUDGE)
jsr
W.P.(Crl)No.125/09 3
W.P.(Crl)No.125/09 4
R.BASANT &C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ.
.No. of 200
ORDER/JUDGMENT
06/02/2009