IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(Crl.).No. 424 of 2009(S)
1. VELAYUDHAN, S/O.KUNJATHAN,
... Petitioner
2. SANTHA, W/O.VELAYUDHAN, DO, DO, DO.
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
4. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
5. BHAVANI, BALAJI NAGAR, NELLORE DISTRICT
For Petitioner :SRI.T.N.MANOJ
For Respondent :SRI.SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :22/12/2009
O R D E R
R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(Crl.)No.424 OF 2009
-----------------------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 22nd DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009
J U D G M E N T
Basant, J.
This judgment must be read in continuation of the earlier orders
passed by us in this case resting with the order dated 14.12.2009. The
learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners and the
alleged detenue are taking steps to claim police protection. The
learned counsel for the 5th respondent submits that some further time
may be granted to the 5th respondent to seek appropriate reliefs.
2. We have already adverted to the matter in detail in the
order dated 2.12.2009. The alleged detenue has been traced and he is
now residing along with the petitioners. The 5th respondent was
accommodated at the Santhinikethan Hostel for reasons which are
given in the order dated 2.12.2009. We are satisfied that no further
directions are necessary in this Writ Petition. The 5th respondent
through her counsel prays that she who is at present accommodated at
the Santhinikethan Hostel may be permitted to shift her residence to a
paying guest accommodation at Kaloor which she has secured. She is
not under any orders passed by this Court obliged to remain in the
Santhinikethan Hostel. Accepting her request and considering her
W.P.(Crl.)No.424/09 -2-
plight, she was permitted to be accommodated there. We accordingly
opine that it shall be open to the 5th respondent to leave the said Hostel
and shift to a paying guest accommodation which she claims that she
has secured.
3. We are satisfied now that no further directions are
necessary in this Writ Petition and further proceedings in this Writ
Petition can now be discontinued.
4. In the result:
(a) this Writ Petition is allowed in part.
(b) the alleged detenue who has appeared before Court and who
is now continuing to reside with the petitioners is set at
liberty and shall be free to pursue whatever course he feels is
necessary and advantageous to him.
(c) The 5th respondent who has been directed to be
accommodated at the Santhinikethan Hostel is permitted to
leave that Hostel with effect from today(i.e., 22.12.2009).
Hand over copy to both counsel.
R.BASANT, JUDGE.
M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.
dsn
W.P.(Crl.)No.424/09 -3-
R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
————————————————–
W.P.(Crl.)No.424 OF 2009
—————————————————–
DATED THIS THE 2nd DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009
O R D E R
Basant, J.
Facts can be stranger than fiction, but it is difficult always to
swallow that statement. Facts of the instant case suggest that
even that statement can be understatement.
2. The petitioners are parents of a young man aged 34
years, Santhosh by name. He is an educated person. He is well
employed. He has remained married for about three years. The
couple have not been blessed with any child so far.
3. While so, as usual, he went in connection with his work
from his house on 9.9.2009. He returned for a short while on
12.9.2009 and left his home promising his parents that he will
come back later. The petitioners, the parents of Santhosh are
respectively a retired Head Constable and a retired School
Teacher. They found that Santhosh was not returning at all.
Doubts gave way to anxiety and the unfortunate petitioners
started desperately attempting to trace their son. While so,
W.P.(Crl.)No.424/09 -4-
they received a letter written by the 5th respondent in which she
has mentioned that their son is available with her, offering
protection to her who on account of various circumstances had
contemplated suicide and Santhosh had come to her as a savior to
rescue her from her predicament. The 5th respondent is a married
woman. She has two grown up children aged 14 years and 10
years. Her husband is respectably employed. He is stated to be
an Inspector of Customs and Central Excise at Vijayawada. They
had got married in 1993. The petitioners came to know that a
crime has been registered at Vijayawada alleging that their son
had kidnapped the 5th respondent. Not only officials of the police,
but also persons of questionable character, goondas and ruffians
according to the petitioners, were harassing the petitioners making
efforts to trace their son and the 5th respondent. It is, in these
circumstances, that the petitioners came to this Court with this
petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace
and produce their son Santhosh. They apprehend that their son
was being detained by some persons interested in the 5th
respondent or perhaps by the 5th respondent herself.
4. This petition was filed on 20.10.2009. It was admitted
W.P.(Crl.)No.424/09 -5-
on 21.10.2009. This order must be read in continuation of the
earlier orders passed, resting with the order dated 30.11.2009.
5. Today when the case is called, petitioners along with
their counsel are present. The 5th respondent and the alleged
detenu have come before this Court. The 5th respondent is
represented by a counsel. When the case was called in the
morning, Adv.Shri Rajesh Chakiat represented before Court that
he wants to file an application on behalf of the brother and
husband of the 5th respondent. The learned counsel represented in
Court that they only want to know whether the 5th respondent is
illegally detained by the alleged detenu or anyone else. The
learned counsel represented in Court that if the 5th respondent
states that she does not want to return with her relatives – her
brother, husband, etc. they have no objection against the 5th
respondent continuing with the alleged detenu. In Court the 5th
respondent stated that she does not want to speak to them at all.
The alleged detenu as also the 5th respondent expressed
apprehensions before Court that they may be attacked and
whisked away by her relatives who according to them have the
support and assistance of the police as also goonda gangs. The
W.P.(Crl.)No.424/09 -6-
learned counsel Shri Rajesh Chakiat was requested to file a proper
application, if he wants to seek any orders from the Court.
Subsequently, the learned counsel has not appeared before Court.
Along with the counsel, some persons were found present in the
Court. The 5th respondent identifies those persons to be her
husband and her brother with some others.
6. As the alleged detenu comes along with the 5th
respondent, we wanted the alleged detenu to be left alone so that
he can give his genuine response to us uninfluenced by anyone
when we interact with him. The petitioners, the parents of the
alleged detenu requested and were permitted to have interactions
with the alleged detenu while he was permitted to remain in the
Chamber.
7. After lunch recess, we interacted with the alleged
detenu separately initially. Thereafter, we interacted with his
parents, the petitioners and later we interacted with him in the
presence of the 5th respondent also. Counsel for the petitioners,
the 5th respondent and the learned Government Pleader were also
present when such interactions went on.
8. The alleged detenu has a weird version to advance.
W.P.(Crl.)No.424/09 -7-
According to him, he did not know the 5th respondent at all. In his
telephone, there was a facility to “find a friend”. Using that
facility, in September, 2009 he came to interact with the 5th
respondent, a total stranger at Vijayawada. The 5th respondent
had several pathetic personal problems, according to the alleged
detenu. The alleged detenu took pity on the helpless position of
the 5th respondent. They had frequent interactions over
telephone. On one occasion, the alleged detenu travelled along
with the 5th respondent between Nelloor and Vijayawada.
According to the alleged detenu, he had taken pity on the plight of
the 5th respondent and his intention was only to save her. She
needed protection from her relatives and he is giving her that
protection. According to him, but for such protection offered by
him at the required time, the 5th respondent may have chosen to
end her life. He feels morally obliged to continue to give her such
protection. According to him, his parents as well as his wife shall
understand him perfectly and he has no improper relationship
whatsoever with the 5th respondent at all. If she wants to return
to Vijayawada with her relatives, he has no objection, but he feels
that, that may endanger the life of the 5th respondent. In these
W.P.(Crl.)No.424/09 -8-
circumstances, he feels obliged to continue to give her necessary
support and protection. He airs the apprehension that he and the
5th respondent may be done away with by the relatives of the 5th
respondent and hirelings acting on their behalf. In these
circumstances, it is prayed that this Court may be pleased to order
protection to the alleged detenu and the 5th respondent. He is
willing to return along with his parents. But, both his parents and
he himself apprehend that harm may be caused to him and them if
they return to their native place at Irinjalakuda.
9. The 5th respondent reiterates the version given by the
alleged detenu. She prays that she may at least be permitted to
seek shelter in any place where her safety can be assured. She
may be sent to any hostel or any Government institution where
she will not be harassed, threatened or intimidated, submits the
5th respondent.
10. The parents of the alleged detenu, the petitioners
herein have a tale of woes to narrate. According to them, the
alleged detenu has chosen to offer assistance to the 5th respondent
when she was facing a crisis. But for that they and their other
relatives are being harassed by the police, muscle men and
W.P.(Crl.)No.424/09 -9-
hirelings engaged by the relatives of the 5th respondent, who they
apprehend have the protection and patronage of the police
themselves.
11. The learned Government Pleader submits that
instructions have been obtained from the 4th respondent. The 4th
respondent asserts that not the 4th respondent, but the
Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada City has to be impleaded.
However, it is stated clearly that a crime has been registered
regarding the disappearance of the 5th respondent as Crime
No.511/09 of Pattamatta Police Station, Vijayawada, Andra
Pradesh. The learned Government Pleader submits that the
appropriate party has to be impleaded in this Writ Petition to
enable the learned Government Pleader to take instructions from
such Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada. The learned counsel
for the petitioners prays that some time may be granted to the
petitioners to take necessary steps. Till then, appropriate orders
may be passed to ensure the protection of the petitioners as also
the alleged detenu and the 5th respondent. The learned counsel
for the 5th respondent also reiterates the request that the 5th
respondent may be afforded the requisite protection until this Writ
W.P.(Crl.)No.424/09 -10-
Petition is disposed of.
12. We have considered all the relevant inputs. We accept
the request of the learned Government Pleader that she may be
permitted to take instructions from the Commissioner of Police,
Vijayawada City after he is properly brought on record. Having
considered all the relevant circumstances, we are satisfied that the
matter requires to be probed into further. The relatives of the 5th
respondent who had appeared before Court this morning must also
be given opportunity to make their submissions, if any. We are
satisfied that the case can be adjourned to another date to enable
the parties to take all necessary steps.
13. This case is hence posted to 14.12.2009. All necessary
steps shall be taken by the parties by that date. The following
directions are issued, which shall occupy the field till the matter is
taken up for consideration again on 14.12.2009.
(i) The alleged detenu Santhosh is permitted to
return along with petitioners 1 and 2 as desired
by all the three of them. The learned
Government Pleader undertakes and specific
directions are hereby issued to the second
W.P.(Crl.)No.424/09 -11-
respondent, the Superintendent of Police,
Thrissur to ensure that adequate police protection
is given to the petitioners and the alleged detenu
to reside peacefully in their house at
Vallattuparambil House, pullur Desom,
Mukundapuram Taluk, Thrissur District. During
this period, though the Deputy Superintendent of
Police, Irinjalakuda, the 3rd respondent shall be
permitted to question the petitioners as also the
alleged detenu at such residence of theirs, they
will not be arrested or otherwise dealt with,
without prior permission of this Court.
(ii) The 5th respondent shall be accommodated at the
Santhinikethan Hostel, Pachalam, Ernakulam till
14.12.2009, as requested by her. The learned
Government Pleader undertakes that and it is
directed that the Commissioner of Police, Kochi
City shall ensure adequate protection for her for
her peaceful residence at Santhinikethan Hostel,
Pachalam. She shall not be arrested or taken
W.P.(Crl.)No.424/09 -12-
into custody by anyone, without the prior
permission of this Court. However, we make it
clear that in connection with the investigation of
any pending case, she can be questioned by the
police at the said Hostel, after taking the
permission of the Hostel authorities.
(iii) In the light of the specific apprehensions
expressed by the petitioners as well as the
alleged detenu and the 5th respondent that they
anticipate harm at the hands of the relatives of
the 5th respondent and their hirelings, specific
directions are issued to the second respondent,
Superintendent of Police, Thrissur and the
Commissioner of Police, Kochi City to ensure that
they are given adequate and sufficient
protection.
(iv) The learned Government Pleader shall ensure
that the petitioners and the alleged detenu are
escorted by police officials to their place of
residence. The 5th respondent shall also be
W.P.(Crl.)No.424/09 -13-
escorted to the Santhinikethan Hostel by the
police.
14. The learned counsel for the 5th respondent submits that
the expenses for accommodation in the hostel till 14.12.2009 shall
be met by the 5th respondent.
15. Towards the close of this dictation, the learned counsel
Shri Rajesh Chakiat appears before Court and submits that the
husband of the 5th respondent and her brother who had wanted
the counsel to make the representations before Court when the
case was called in the morning now submits that they do not now
want to make any such applications.
16. Hand over copy of this order to the learned Government
Pleader for immediate communication to the 2nd respondent and
the Commissioner of Police.
17. Call on 14.12.2009.
R.BASANT, JUDGE.
M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.
dsn