Allowed

Shahina.P.T v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 May 2012WP(C)/740/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition filed by a petitioner seeking recovery of her minor son's passport detained illegally by respondents (mother and brother), the Court directed the Passport Officer to release the passport to the petitioner within three days of receipt of the judgment copy upon payment of formalities.

What did the court decide?

Directing the 6th Respondent to release the passport to the petitioner within three days of receipt of the judgment copy upon production of a certified copy and completion of formalities.

Shahina.P.T Vs State of Kerala — Domestic Violence | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

¶4

MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MAY 2012/31ST VAISAKHA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 740 of 2012 (N)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

SHAHINA.P.T, AGED 23 YEARS D/O.SHAHUL,PUTHUVEETTIL HOUSE, CHAVAKKAD MANATHALA, THRISSUR TALUK.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH)

¶9

RESPONDENT(S): --------------

¶10

STATE OF KERALA

¶11

REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. HOME DEPARTMENT

¶12

GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001.

¶13

THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

¶14

GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 001.

¶15

THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE

¶16

GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 001.

¶17

SHERIFFA

¶18

W/O.ALI, MAMSRYAYILATH HOUSE, PADOOR MULLASSERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 001.

¶19

DILSHAD

¶20

S/O.ALI, MAMSRYAYILATH HOUSE, PADOOR

¶21

MULLASSERY, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 001.

¶22

THE PASSPORT OFFICER PASSPORT OFFICE, KOCHI 68202.

¶23

BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA

¶24

BY ADV. SRI.K.PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶25

BY SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA

¶26

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI JOSEPH GEORGE FOR R1 TO R3

¶27

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21-05-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶28

WPC NO.740/2012

¶29

APPENDIX

¶30

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶31

EXHIBIT P1. A TRUE COPY OF THE EMERGENCY FORM IN THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE MINISTRY OF HEALTH, UAE DATED NIL.

¶32

EXHIBIT P2. A TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF THE CHILD OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE THRISSUR CORPORATION DATED 30.07.2009.

¶33

EXHIBIT P3. A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.8 OF 2012 1/1/2012 OF THE CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION.

¶34

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE PASSPORT DETAILS OF THE CHILD OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED DATED 13/10/2009.

¶35

EXHIBIT P5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT ISSUED BY THE EMBASSY OF INDIA.

¶36

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

¶37

EXT.R6(a):TRUE COPY OF THE MESSAGE SENT BY FAX AND EMAIL.

¶38

ms

¶39

\\True copy//

¶40

P.A to Judge

¶41

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.

¶42

W.P.(C). No.740/2012-N

¶43

Dated this the 21^st day of May, 2012

¶44

J U D G M E N T

¶45

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for a direction to respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 6 to sieze the passport, the details of which are available in Ext.P4, from the illegal custody of respondent Nos.4 and 5 and to provide it to the petitioner after due enquiry and adjudication.

¶46

It is averred in the writ petition that the passport of her son Master Zihan Irshad aged 2¹ /2 years was detained illegally by respondent Nos.4 and 5. The petitioner was married to one Shri Irshad Ali in 2007. They have been residing in Abu Dhabi. The fourth respondent is the mother of the husband and the fifth respondent is the brother. It appears that the marital tie ruptured on account of various discords. Ext.P2 is the copy of the birth certificate of the child. It is averred in the writ petition that respondent Nos.4 and 5 forcibly took the child to India. Ext.P3 is the copy of the First Information Report in Crime No.8/2012 of Chavakkad Police Station registered at the instance of the petitioner alleging offences under Sections 406, 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶47

W.P.(C).No.740/2012

¶48

-:2:-

¶49

The details of the passport of the child has been produced by the petitioner as Ext.P4. It is the allegation of the petitioner that the passport is illegally detained by respondent Nos.4 and 5. It is under these circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

¶50

This Court passed various interim orders in the matter. By interim order dated 22/02/2012, this Court directed that steps will be taken against respondent Nos.4 and 5 and whichever other persons who may be in possession of the passport. When the matter came up for hearing on 09/04/2012, this Court recorded the submission of the learned Assistant Solicitor General that the father of the minor child has been informed through the Embassy that unless he produces the passport of the minor child, his passport would also be impounded. Certain other directions have also been issued.

¶51

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that pursuant to the said interim order, the passport has been surrendered to the Embassy of Abu Dhabi and from there it has been now sent to the Passport Office at Kochi. It is further submitted that the petitioner has filed an application to release the passport to the petitioner but the sixth respondent has not taken any action in the matter so far.

¶52

W.P.(C).No.740/2012

¶53

-:3:-

¶54

Learned Additional Solicitor General submitted that only

¶55

because of the pendency of the writ petition, so far no action has been taken on the application.

¶56

It is made clear that the sixth respondent can take appropriate action to see that the passport is released to the petitioner on production of a certified copy of this Judgment. The sixth respondent will see that the same is released after completing the formalities, if any, within three days from the date of receipt of a copy of the Judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.

¶57

(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE)

¶58

Shahina.P.T v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahina.P.T v. State of Kerala

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

Pramod Kumar V.P. Vs District Officer, Kpsc

Sajeev Kumar.S. Vs Government of Kerala & Others

C.T.Devassy Vs Pension Board

Abraham C Joseph Vs State of Kerala

T.N.Babu Vs the Senior Geologist

Mohammed Ali Vs the District Collector