Dismissed

Prathapan G. v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Nov 2012WP(Crl.)/509/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition for habeas corpus filed by a petitioner seeking the liberation of Ummaimath, alleged to be detained by her mother and brother. After two medical boards reported no psychiatric impairment and normal cardiovascular status, the Court held that Ummaimath is a free person and directed that she not be detained against her wishes.

What the court decided

AI extract

Prathapan G. Vs the State of Kerala — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BABU MATHEW P.JOSEPH

¶4

MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/21ST KARTHIKA 1934 WP(Crl.).No. 509 of 2012 (S) ----------------------------

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

PRATHAPAN G., AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, RANNIKKUNNATHU HOUSE, NELLICKAPPARA P.O., ARUVAPPULAM VILLAGE, NEERAMKKULAM DESAM, KOZHANCHERRY THALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT PIN: 689 691.

¶7

BY ADVS.SRIP.S.SUJETH SMT.M.R.REENA

¶8

RESPONDENT(S):

¶9

1. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PALAKKAD, PIN: 671 001.

¶10

2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 303.

¶11

3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 303.

¶12

4. FATHIMA, AGED ABOUT 55, W/O.ISMAIL, 3/238A, MADATHIL HOUSE, CHERUKODE.P.O., VALLAPUZHA PANCHAYATH, PIN: 679 336.

¶13

5. ABHU THAHIR, AGED 20, S/O.ISMAIL, 3/238A, MADATHIL HOUSE, CHERUKODE.P.O., VALLAPUZHA PANCHAYATH, PIN: 679 336.

¶14

ADDL. R6 & R7 IMPLEADED

¶15

6. UMMAIMATH, D/O.ISMAIL, 3/238A, MADATHIL HOUSE, CHERUKODE.P.O., VALLAPUZHA PANCHAYATH, PIN: 679 336

¶16

WP(Crl.).No. 509 of 2012 (S)

¶17

7. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD.

¶18

(ADDL.R6 AND R7 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 19/10/2012)

¶19

R1 TO R3 BY SRI.K.F.ABDUL RASHEED, ADDL, DGP

¶20

R4 & R5 BY ADV. SRI.P.JAYARAM

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

¶23

WP(Crl.).No. 509 of 2012 (S)

¶24

APPENDIX

¶25

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶26

EXT.P1,P1(A)TO ( C ):	COPY OF THE AWARD WINNING PAINTING DROWN BY THE PETITIONER AND OTHER RECOGNITIONS OF THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P2:	COPY OF THE MEDICAL PRESCRIPTION AND CERTIFICATE FROM PNVM HOSPITAL, ERNAKULAM.
EXT.P3:	HAND WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE LADY SHOWING THE CRUELTY METED OUT BY THE RELATIVES AGAINST THE LADY.
EXT.P4:	COPY OF COMPLAINT GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE S.I OF POLICE MALAMBUZHA.
EXT.P5:	DISCHARGE SUMMARY & TREATMENT CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT HOSPITAL, PALAKKAD.
EXT.P6:	COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE PATTAMBI ARTS & SCIENCE COLLEGE.

¶27

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

PIUS C KURIAKOSE &

BABU MATHEW P JOSEPH, JJ

¶33

.................................................. WP(cr).No.509 of 2012 .................................................. Dated 12^th November, 2012

¶34

JUDGMENT

¶35

Pius C Kuriakose, J

¶36

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner who claims to be a Philanthropist seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus for liberating Ummaimath, alleged to be in the illegal custody of respondents 4 and 5, her mother and brother, for producing her body before this court. In fact the following are the reliefs sought for in the writ petition.

¶37

“i) To issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents 1 to 3 or other concerned respondents to produce Ummaimath before this Hon'ble Court and to conduct enquiry and find the lady from the hands of the 4^th and 5^th respondents and the persons under them, within a time limit, in the interest of justice. ii)To issue appropriate Writ, directing the third respondent to take up the Ext.P4 petition and to direct the respondents 2 to 3 or other

¶38

Wpcr 509/12

¶39

¶40

concerned respondents to produce the detenue Ummaimath from the hands of the 4^th and 5^th respondents and the persons under them, within a time limit, in the interest of justice”.

¶41

On considering this writ petition for admission, we on 11.10.2012 passed the following order.

¶42

“Not admitted. Sri N.Suresh, the learned Govt.Pleader takes notice on behalf of R1 to R3. Sri Suresh will seek instruction from the concerned among R1 to R3 as to the correctness of the allegations in the writ petition. Issue notice on admission by speed post to R4 and R5. Post on 19.10.2012”.

¶43

The above order was followed by a detailed order on

¶44

19.10.2012, which reads as follows:-

¶45

Ummaimath, D/o. Ismail, 3/238A, Madathil House, Cherukode P.O, Vallapuzha Panchayat, Palakkad - 679 336, the alleged detenue is suo motu impleaded as additional 6^th respondent in this writ petition. Registry will carry out necessary corrections in the cause title.

¶46

This writ petition has been filed by a

¶47

Wpcr 509/12

¶48

¶49

Philanthropist -cum- Artist seeking a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing respondents 4 and 5 respectively the mother and brother of the detenue (who has been impleaded today as additional 6^th respondent) for the production of the additional 6^th respondent before this court liberating her from the illegal custody of respondents 4 and 5. It is alleged by the petitioner that during the course of his philanthropic activities, he came into contact with the additional 6^th respondent who is suffering from acute cardiac ailments and was for some time undergoing treatment of Dr.George Erali, Cardiologist attached to PNVM Hospital, Ernakulam. According to the petitioner, the additional 6^th respondent shared the difficulties which she is experiencing in her house with him and it was revealed that the members of the additional 6^th respondent's family are not at all keen on giving proper treatment to the additional 6^th respondent for her cardiac ailments. Instead of treating her for cardiac ailments, the members of her family are alleging that she has mental ailments. Even for

¶50

Wpcr 509/12

¶51

¶52

mental ailments, she is not being given proper treatment. But the so-called mental ailments are being treated by them through a sorcerer in whom the additional 6^th respondent has no faith. 3. On considering this writ petition for admission, we directed Mr.Suresh, learned Government Pleader who took notice for respondents 1 to 3 to seek instructions from the concerned among R1 to R3 as to the correctness of the allegations in the writ petition. We issued notice on admission by speed post to R4 and R5. Today Mr.P.M.Saneer, learned Government Pleader who appears on behalf of the Additional Director General of Prosecution Mr.K.I.Abdul Rasheed submits that the instructions received from the police are to the effect that Ummaimath is having some mental ailments and requires treatment. Even though we have not issued any rule nisi for production of Ummaimath before this court, Ummaimath today has come to this court on getting information regarding pendency of this writ petition. According to her, she came along with

¶53

¶54

Wpcr 509/12

¶55

respondents 4 and 5 and also her own father Mr.Ismail on receiving information from the Pattambi Police regarding pendency of the writ petition. We interacted in detail with Ummaimath, the alleged detenue, her father Mr.Ismail and the petitioner, Mr.Prathapan. We heard Mr.P.M.Saneer, learned Government Pleader on behalf of the Additional Director General of Prosecution, Mr.P.Jayaram, learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5 and Mr.P.S.Sujeth, learned counsel for the petitioner. Having regard to the interaction which we had with Ummaimath, her father and the petitioner and also the submissions addressed at the Bar, we feel that this is a case where a clear picture requires to be obtained regarding the health condition of Ummaimath, the additional 6^th respondent both mental as well as cardiac. We therefore implead the District Medical Officer, Palakkad suo motu as additional 7^th respondent in this writ petition. Registry will carry out necessary corrections in the cause title. The Additional Director General of Prosecution takes notice on behalf of the

¶56

Wpcr 509/12 6

¶57

additional 7^th respondent. The additional 7^th respondent is directed to constitute two separate Medical Boards; one consisting of Psychiatrist and other experts in mental health and another consisting of experts in Cardiology. The Medical Boards will issue notice to Ummaimath through the 1^st respondent for appearance before them. The Boards will observe Ummaimath for such periods of time as required by them. The Boards will forward their reports regarding the mental health as well as cardiac health of Ummaimath to this court.

¶58

Handover this order to the counsel for the parties and to Mr.Saneer, learned Government Pleader today itself.

¶59

Post on 12.11.2012”.

¶60

Pursuant to the above order, District Medical Officer

¶61

of Health, Palakkad constituted two separate Medical Boards. Both the Boards examined Ummaimath and submitted separate reports. The report submitted by the Board consisting of Psychiatrist concludes that no evidence

¶62

Wpcr 509/12

¶63

¶64

of a syndromal acute psychiatric illness which impairs Ummaimath's capacity to take care of herself and

¶65

livelyhood and which requires active psychiatric treatment is visible at present.

¶66

The other Medical Board which was constituted for assessing the cardiac health of Ummaimath reported that Ummaimath had normal cardiovascular functional status and though borderline LVH noticed as per the echo cardiogram, patient does not require any treatment at present.

¶67

Today, the detenue Ummaimath, the petitioner Sri G.Prathapan and Ismail, father of Ummaimath are present before us. We interacted with all of them. The only question is whether the relief sought for in the writ petition should be granted. According to us, in the light of what is now revealed to us, especially by the reports of the two Medical Boards, the above question can be answered in the negative only. We make it clear that respondents 4 and 5, mother and brother of Ummaimath are not entitled to detain

¶68

Wpcr 509/12

¶69

¶70

Ummaimath against her wishes. We clarify that Ummaimath is a free person and nobody has the right to

¶71

interfere with her freedom and liberty.

¶72

Issue copy of judgment to both sides.

¶73

PIUS C KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

¶74

BABU MATHEW P JOSEPH, JUDGE

¶75

lgk

Prathapan G. v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Prathapan G. v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shajil Vs Namitha

Tijo Vs Bincy

Seena Vs Haridas

Lalithabai.T. Vs State of Kerala

The Kerala State Wakf Board Vs Kasam Moosa Sait Wakf Alal-Aulad

The President, Ambangad Ksheerolpadaka Sahakarana Sangham Vs Suchithra Devi.K.C.