Dismissed

Jyothidev.v.S. v. the Superintendent Fo Police and Ors.

Kerala HC19 Jun 2009WP(Crl.)/232/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a habeas corpus petition filed by a husband seeking production of his wife, who was allegedly detained at her parents' home. During hearings, the wife confirmed the marriage and willingness to return. Upon mediation confirming a harmonious settlement and the parties' marital status, the court recorded the settlement and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed. The settlement reached in mediation is recorded. It is allowed that the parties lead a harmonious marital life without obstruction.

Jyothidev.v.S. Vs the Superintendent Fo… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 19TH JUNE 2009 / 29TH JYAISHTA 1931

¶5

WP(Crl.).No. 232 of 2009(S) ---------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER(S): ---------------

¶7

JYOTHIDEV.V.S., AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.SAMBASIVAN, ORIGINALLY OF POOJAPPURA, PULKULANGARA, KALLUMTHAZHOM P.O., KOLLAM, NOW RESIDING AT THEKKEPANDILAZHIKOM, MUNDACKAL WEST, KOLLAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.V.V.RAJA SRI.R.RANJITH

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

¶11

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM.

¶12

THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNDARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM.

¶13

PRAVIN, S/O.EDWARD, AGED 30 YEARS, THAYYIL PUTHEN VEEDU, PERAYAM, KUMBALAM P.O., KUNDARA.

¶14

GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

**R.BASANT & M.C.HARIRANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * *** W.P.(Crl).No.232 of 2009

¶17

Dated this the 19^th day of June 2009

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

BASANT,J

¶20

The petitioner has filed this petition praying for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search, trace and produce his wife Preethi, a woman aged 27 years (date of birth : 11/04/1982). It is the contention of the petitioner that he and the alleged detenu Preethi were married on 5/12/2008 and their marriage was solemnised and registered under the Special Marriage Act. Ext.P1 is the certificate issued to confirm that fact.

¶21

According to the petitioner, after marriage, they were residing together harmoniously. The 3^rd respondent who is employed abroad had come down and under the pretext that there could be a harmonious settlement, the alleged detenu Preethi was taken to her parental house. It is the contention of the petitioner that the 3^rd respondent, the brother of Preethi had thereafter illegally detained her and the petitioner was not being permitted to have any contact with the said Preethi.

¶22

The petition came up for admission on 17/6/2009. The petition was admitted. Notice was ordered to the respondents. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, the petitioner and his

¶23

W.P.(Crl) No.232/09 2

¶24

counsel are present. The 3^rd respondent and mother of Preethi - the alleged detenu are also present. Preethi - the alleged detenu has also come to court along with her mother.

¶25

We ascertained the response of the alleged detenu Preethi and she confirmed to us that she was married to the petitioner and he is her legally wedded husband. She asserted that she wants to leave the court along with the petitioner.

¶26

Smelling the opportunity for a harmonious settlement of the dispute between the parties after hearing all concerned, we requested Sri.N.R.Chandrasekharan - a trained mediator who happened to be present in court to help the court to explore the possibilities of a harmonious settlement. The Nodal Officer was informed. The parties were sent to the mediator. By 1 p.m, the mediator has submitted a report in which it is reported that the parties have settled all their outstanding disputes harmoniously. The settlement reached in the course of mediation duly signed by the petitioner, the third respondent, the alleged detenu and the mother of the detenu confirm that all concerned accept that the petitioner and the alleged detenu to be legally married spouses. It is agreed that none of the parties shall raise any objections to the harmonious marital relationship between the petitioner and the alleged detenu Preethi.

¶27

The petitioner through his counsel and the alleged detenu Preethi submit that no further directions are necessary in this writ

¶28

W.P.(Crl) No.232/09

¶29

¶30

petition. The alleged detenu Preethi requests the court that it may be ensured that she is permitted to live harmoniously and without any hindrance with her husband, the petitioner herein.

¶31

We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that the settlement reached in mediation can be received and recorded and this writ petition can be dismissed. We accept the submissions of the 3^rd respondent and his mother Agnus that they shall not cause any hindrance or obstruction to the harmonious marital tie and co-habitation of the petitioner and the alleged detenu. If there be no obstruction, needless to say, the petitioner and the alleged detenu can approach the police authorities who shall ensure that necessary protection is given to the petitioner and the alleged detenu to so harmoniously lead a marital life.

¶32

This petition is accordingly dismissed with the above observations.

¶33

Hand over copy of this judgment to the learned Government Pleader.

¶34

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

¶35

(M.C.HARIRANI, JUDGE)

¶36

jsr

¶37

W.P.(Crl) No.232/09 4

¶38

W.P.(Crl) No.232/09

¶39

¶40

R.BASANT & M.C.HARIRANI, JJ.

¶41

.No. of 200

¶42

ORDER/JUDGMENT

¶43

18/06/2009

Jyothidev.v.S. v. the Superintendent Fo Police and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jyothidev.v.S. v. the Superintendent Fo Police and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Asokan Vs Rajalekshmi

Vinija Vs State of Kerala

Philip Thomas Palamoottil Vs Sherry Susan Koshy

Gopalakrishnan Vs Maya

Gopalakrishnan Vs Maya

T.D. Kuriakose Vs M.J. Jigili