Allowed

Mohanakumar M v. K.Ramachandran & Others

Kerala HC21 Dec 2010WP(Crl.)/460/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a writ petition for habeas corpus filed by a husband to trace his wife and minor children who were alleged to be illegally detained. The court recorded that disputes were amicably settled by the parties. Directions were issued for the return of the detained persons to the petitioner under a settlement agreement outlining future residence and visitation terms.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed; alleged detenues permitted to leave Court with petitioner; directions issued for return to respondent's house and subsequent residence with petitioner under agreed terms.

Mohanakumar M Vs K.Ramachandran & Others — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 21ST DECEMBER 2010 / 30TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 460 of 2010(S) --------------------------PETITIONER: ---------------

¶3

MOHANAKUMAR.M, S/O.V.APPU, AGED 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT `PRIYA NIVAS', KAVINPURAM, VILAPPILASALA P.O., TRIVANDRUM.

¶4

BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH

¶5

RESPONDENTS:

¶6

¶7

K.RAMACHANDRAN, RESIDING AT DEEPASADANAM, KARUMKULAM VIA (VIZHINJAM), PUTHIYA THURA POST, TRIVANDRUM-695 526.

¶8

P.SARASWATHI, W/O.RAMACHANDRAN, RESIDING AT DEEPASADANAM, KARUMKULAM VIA (VIZHINJAM), PUTHIYA THURA POST, TRIVANDRUM-695 526.

¶9

RAJESH @ MANIYAN, S/O.RAMACHANDRAN, RESIDING AT DEEPASADANAM, KARUMKULAM VIA (VIZHINJAM), PUTHIYA THURA POST, TRIVANDRUM-695 526.

¶10

SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KARAKULAM POLICE STATION, TRIVANDRUM-695 564.

¶11

CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POOVAR POLICE STATION, TRIVANDRUM-695 525.

¶12

THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, TRIVANDRUM RURAL, TRIVANDRUM-695 002.

¶13

SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.J.MUHAMMED ANZAR ADV. SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. FOR R1-3 SRI.G.P.SHINOD FOR R1-3 SRI.P.GOVIND FOR R1-3

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

**R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *************************

¶16

**W.P(Crl) No.460 of 2010 *******************************

¶17

Dated this the 21^st day of December, 2010

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

BASANT, J.

¶20

This judgment must be read in continuation of the earlier orders passed by us resting with the order dated 10.12.2010.

¶21

Today when the case is called, the petitioner and his wife, the alleged detenue Deepa are present before Court. The 1^st respondent, father of the alleged detenu, is also present. The petitioner, his wife and his father in law state before us that all disputes between the parties have been settled amicably. The parties are abiding by the conditions stipulated in the order dated 10.12.2010. They confirm that they stand by the stipulations in the said order. As the disputes have been harmoniously settled, all of them pray that insistence may not be made on filing of a fresh joint statement incorporating in detail all the terms of settlement. The petitioner, the alleged detenue and the 1^st respondent reiterate and assert before us that they stand by the terms agreed to by them, which have been enumerated in detail in the order dated 10.12.2010.

¶22

W.P(Crl) No.460 of 2010

¶23

¶24

Parties agree and accordingly we issue the following

¶25

directions:

¶26

a) This Writ Petition is allowed. We record statement of the petitioner, the alleged detenue and the 1^st respondent that they stand by the stipulations recorded in the order dated 10.12.2010;

¶27

b) We permit the alleged detenue to leave the Court along with her husband, the petitioner, as agreed to by her and by her parents.

¶28

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

¶29

(K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE)

¶30

rtr/

¶31

W.P(Crl) No.460 of 2010

¶32

¶33

**R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *************************

¶34

W.P(Crl) No.460 of 2010

¶35

W.P(Crl) No.460 of 2010

¶36

¶37

¶38

Dated this the 10^th day of December, 2010

¶39

ORDER

¶40

BASANT, J.

¶41

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 wife and two minor children. He apprehended that they were illegally detained and confined by respondents 1 to 3, the parents in law and brother in law respectively of the petitioner.

¶42

Today when the case is called, the petitioner is present. He is represented by his counsel. Respondents 1 to 3 are present. They are represented by a counsel. Along with them, the alleged detenues Deepa and her two minor children have also come to Court.

¶43

We interacted with the alleged detenue Deepa alone initially and later in the presence of her husband, the petitioner. Subsequently we interacted with them in the presence of the father of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3 and the learned Government Pleader were present.

¶44

W.P(Crl) No.460 of 2010

¶45

¶46

Attempts were made to settle their disputes harmoniously. We are happy to note that at the end of the discussions and at the intervention of counsel, parties have settled their disputes. Accordingly they agree and we issue the following directions:

¶47

i) Deepa and her two minor children shall today return from Court along with the petitioner;

¶48

ii) On Sunday, the 12^th day of December, 2010, the spouses along with their children shall proceed to the house of respondents 1 to 3. They shall be well received there. After lunch on that day, they shall return along with the children to the house of the petitioner;

¶49

iii) Deepa and her children shall reside along with the petitioner at the house where he lives now. They agree that a 15 cent plot standing in their joint name shall be sold and another property with a house therein/apartment shall be purchased in their joint names at the earliest - at any rate, within a period of five months from this date. When the proposals are finalised, they shall seek directions from this Court for actual execution of the sale deed;

¶50

iv) It is agreed that the sale and purchase shall take place

¶51

W.P(Crl) No.460 of 2010 6

¶52

at the earliest - at any rate, within a period of five months from this date. If the sale is not completed within a period of five months, appropriate further directions shall be sought from this Court;

¶53

v) Deepa and the petitioner agree that attempts shall be made to secure an employment for Deepa in Government service. Till such employment is secured, they agree that, they shall try for a respectable employment acceptable to both, so that Deepa can profitably utilise her spare time;

¶54

vi) Once every month - on the second Saturdays, Deepa shall go to her parental home along with the children. She can return by evening on the following Sunday. Whenever possible, the petitioner shall also accompany them. If there be any difficulty to so proceed on the Second Saturday, the spouses agree to similarly go to the parental home of Deepa on any other following day during the same month;

¶55

vii) The parties shall report before this Court on 21.12.2010 and both parties shall file a joint statement incorporating in detail all the terms of settlement;

¶56

viii) The learned Government Pleader undertakes that the

¶57

W.P(Crl) No.460 of 2010

¶58

¶59

4^th respondent, the Sub Inspector of Police, Karakulam Police Station, shall be instructed to ensure that the arrangement works properly and to report to the learned Government Pleader violation, if any, of the terms.

¶60

ix) It shall be open to the parties to seek appropriate further directions from this Court from time to time.

¶61

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

¶62

(K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE)

¶63

rtr/

Mohanakumar M v. K.Ramachandran & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohanakumar M v. K.Ramachandran & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajayakumar @ John Vs Nisha P. @ Mary

P.Nandakumar Vs M.P.Latha

Thangalkunju Vs Shahida

Jayachandran Nair Vs R.Jayasree

Gangadharan Vs Sathyabhama.K.a.

Nazer Vs Sameera