Allowed

Biju Philipose v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC4 Sept 2018WP(Crl.)/334/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A petitioner filed a Habeas Corpus petition alleging illegal confinement of his temple-married daughter by her parents. After recording the detenue's statement expressing desire to leave her parents, the court ordered the parents to surrender her educational records and set her at liberty.

What did the court decide?

The alleged detenue was set at liberty to go along with the petitioner. An undertaking was recorded for surrender of educational records.

Biju Philipose Vs State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶5

TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018/13TH BHADRA, 1940

¶6

WP(Crl.).No. 334 of 2018

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

BIJU PHILIPOSE AGED 37 YEARS S/O. PHILIPOSE, BIJU BHAVAN, AICKARAKONAM, KAKKODE P.O., PUNALUR, KOLLAM - 691331.

¶9

BY ADV. SMT. SINDHU SANTHALINGAM

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, ANNEXE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.

¶12

2 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KAKKODE, KOLLAM - 691331.

¶13

3 P.V. SUNIL VIDHYA BHAVAN, KAKKODE P.O., KOLLAM - 691331.

¶14

4 K. LITTY W/O. P.V. SUNIL, VIDHYA BHAVAN, KAKKODE P.O., KOLLAM - 691331.

¶15

OTHER PRESENT:

¶16

GOVERNMENT PLEADER-SRI.K.B.RAMANAND

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04.09.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

W.P.(Crl) No. 334 /2018

¶19

-:2:-

¶20

J U D G M E N T

¶21

Abdul Rehim, J.

¶22

The petitioner is invoking jurisdiction vested on this court

¶23

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus for directing production of the corpus of Swathy Sunil(hereinafter referred to as 'the alleged detenue'), who is the daughter of respondents 3 and 4, based on an allegation that she is under illegal confinement of those respondents.

¶24

It is stated in the writ petition that the petitioner had married the alleged detenue through rites and ceremonies performed in a temple, namely Sree Kasilingam Guruswamy Temple, Amaravila, Neyyattinkara; and they have registered the marriage under provisions of the Kerala Registration of Marriages (Common) Rules, 2008, before the Marriage Officer, Neyyattinkara Municipality. Ext.P1 certificate is produced in

¶25

W.P.(Crl) No. 334 /2018

¶26

-:3:-

¶27

proof of the above said facts. The marriage was solemnized on 27.04.2017 and it was registered on the same date. The alleged detenue had completed her BDS course. But she has to clear two more papers in the final year. After the marriage the alleged detenue used to visit the petitioner's house and used to stay there intermittently. During December 2017, the respondents 3 and 4 came to know about the relationship and they ill-treated the alleged detenue and detained her in their house under confinement. Under such circumstances the petitioner had approached this court on an earlier occasion by filing W.P.(Crl) 9/2018. As per Ext.P4 judgment the said case was disposed of by recording statement of the alleged detenue that she is desiring to remain with her parents. Finding that there exists no illegal detention as alleged, the said writ petition was dismissed. The petitioner alleges that after disposal of the case the alleged detenue is facing constant harassment and torture from her family and she is being detained in the residential house against

¶28

W.P.(Crl) No. 334 /2018

¶29

-:4:-

¶30

her free will. According to the petitioner, the 5^th respondent informed that the alleged detenue will not be allowed to complete her course by writing the examinations. The petitioner was not allowed to contact the alleged detenue in any manner. Hence, based on the allegation that the alleged detenue is under illegal confinement, the above writ petition is filed.

¶31

When the case came up for consideration, we directed the 2^nd respondent to make an inquiry into the allegations of illegal detention and to get a statement of the alleged detenue recorded by deputing a woman police officer. Accordingly a statement recorded from the alleged detenue was produced before this court by the 2^nd respondent. In the said statement the alleged detenue had expressed her desire to go along with the petitioner and requested to permit her to have a life with the petitioner. Under such circumstances we issued notice to respondents 3 and 4 directing them to produce the alleged detenue before this court. Accordingly, respondents 3

¶32

W.P.(Crl) No. 334 /2018

¶33

-:5:-

¶34

and 4 appeared and produced the alleged detenue before this court on today.

¶35

When we interacted with the alleged detenue she conceded about the marriage solemnized in the temple and with respect to the registration of the marriage before the Municipality. She said that, she was persuaded to go along with respondents 3 and 4 at the time of disposal of the earlier writ petition, only based on the promise that a marriage ceremony will be conducted in the presence of family members and relatives. According to her, the respondents 3 and 4 had backed out from such promise. She expressed her strong desire to go along with the petitioner in order to lead a marital life, based on the marriage already solemnized.

¶36

We have also interacted with the petitioner. Since there exits doubt regarding validity of the marriage solemnized before the temple because the petitioner is a Christian by religion, both the petitioner and the alleged detenue had

¶37

W.P.(Crl) No. 334 /2018

¶38

-:6:-

¶39

expressed their desire to solemnize their marriage under Section 13 of the Special Marriage Act before the appropriate authority. Both of them said that they will be taking steps to complete the requisite formalities, immediately. It was agreed upon that, the petitioner and his family members will make necessary facilities to the alleged detenue to appear for the examinations, in order to complete her course.

¶40

The petitioner made a request to this court to direct the respondents 3 and 4 to handover all the educational records and books, as well as the documents relating to identity proof of the alleged detenue, in order to pursue her studies. Learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4 conceded that, whatever records available in the house will be entrusted with the 2^nd respondent, on tomorrow itself. The alleged detenue will be at liberty to collect those records from the 2^nd respondent. The above undertaking is hereby recorded.

¶41

Considering the circumstances as mentioned above,

¶42

W.P.(Crl) No. 334 /2018

¶43

-:7:-

¶44

we are inclined to set the alleged detenue at liberty to go along

¶45

with the petitioner to lead a marital life with him as desired by her. Hence, we order so and dispose of the original petition accordingly.

¶46

Sd/- C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE .

¶47

Sd/- R. NARAYANA PISHARADI, JUDGE .

ul/-

[True copy]

P.S. to Judge.

W.P.(Crl) No. 334 /2018

¶52

-:8:-

¶53

APPENDIX

¶54

PETITIONER'S' EXHIBITS:

¶55

EXT. P1 True copy of the certificate of marriage dtd.27.04.2017 issued by the Neyyattinkara Municipality.

¶56

Ext.P2 True copy of the complaint dtd.3/1/2018 submitted by the petitioner before the 2^nd respondent.

¶57

Ext.P3 True copy of the order dtd. 18.1.2018 in WP(CRL) 9/2018 of this court.

¶58

Ext.P4 True copy of the judgment dtd.2.2.18 in WP(CRL) 9/2018 of this court.

Biju Philipose v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biju Philipose 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Binu Baby Vs Suja

Bipin C.R. Vs Meera D.S.

Piyoosh A.J Vs Balram

S.Janaki @ Janaki Nayar Vs S.Madhusoodhanan Nair

Xevi Joseph Alias Xavy Joseph Vs Nisha

T.Sheeja Vs C.P Balakrishnan