Disposed

Sushama v. the Circle Inspector of Police

Kerala HC11 Sept 2018WP(Crl.)/345/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala hearing a writ petition for Habeas Corpus by a mother regarding illegal detention of her daughter. The Court noted the petitioner's claim that the daughter was detained by the third and fourth respondents. The daughter, now produced, confirmed a desire to return to her parental home. The Court closed the petition, allowing the daughter to stay with the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition closed; alleged detenue set at liberty to go along with the petitioner as she desired to continue staying in her parental home.

Sushama Vs the Circle Inspector of Police — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018/20TH BHADRA, 1940

¶7

WP(Crl.)No.345 of 2018

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

SUSHAMA,

¶10

AGED 54 YEARS, W/O. PURUSHAN, P.S.BHAVAN, POTHAMPALLI MURI, KUMARAPURAM VILLAGE, KUMARAPURAM POST, KARTHIKAPALLI TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI. K.B. ARUNKUMAR

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, HARIPAD POLICE STATION, HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690 514.

¶14

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, HARIPAD POLICE STATION, HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690 514.

¶15

3 YOUNUS, S/O.AHAMMED, CHOMBALAN HOUSE, PULIPPARA, MEPPADI(PO), WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN 673 577.

¶16

4 AHAMMED, CHOMBALAN HOUSE, PULIPPARA, MEPPADI(PO), WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN 673 577.

¶17

OTHER PRESENT:

¶18

SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.K.B.RAMANAND

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON

¶20

11.09.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WP(Crl.)No.345 of 2018

¶22

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

C.K. ABDUL REHIM, J

¶25

Mother of a girl named Miss.Athira (hereinafter referred to as 'the alleged detenue') is the petitioner herein, approaching this court seeking for issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus commanding production of the corpus of the alleged detenue, based on the allegation that she is under illegal detention of the respondents 3 and 4, against her free will.

¶26

2. It is stated in the writ petition that ; the alleged detenue left the house of the petitioner on the morning of 10.8.2018 under the pretext that she is going to meet one of her friends. But she had not turned up. Attempts of the petitioner to contact her over telephone was also not succeeded. With respect to the missing of the alleged detenue, she made a complaint to the police, based on which crime No.1471/2018 was registered at Haripad Police Station, under Section 57 of the Kerala Police Act. According to the petitioner, it was reliably learnt that the 3^rd respondent is keeping the alleged detenue under illegal confinement with the

¶27

active assistance of the 4^th respondent, who is the father of

¶28

¶29

WP(Crl.)No.345 of 2018

¶30

the 3^rd respondent. Therefore, the petitioner is seeking the relief as mentioned above.

¶31

3. Notice issued from this court to respondents 3 and 4 has not returned. When the case came up for consideration on 3.9.2018, this Court issued direction to respondents 1 and 2 to intensify the investigation of the case registered and to trace out and produce the alleged detenue before this court.

¶32

4. Today, when the case is taken up, the respondents 1 and 2 produced the alleged detenue. It is stated that, the alleged detenue along with the 3^rd respondent was traced out from Wayanad, on 9.9.2018. The alleged detenue was produced before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Harippad on 10.9.2018 and the learned Magistrate had permitted the alleged detenue to go along with the petitioner. It is said that the case registered was already converted to one punishable under Sections 366 and 376 of I.P.C and the 3^rd respondent is arrested in the said case.

¶33

5. When we interacted with the alleged detenue, she said that she developed intimacy with the 3^rd respondent through 'face book' and the 3^rd respondent had in fact misrepresented to her about his qualifications and occupation. According to the

¶34

WP(Crl.)No.345 of 2018

¶35

¶36

alleged detenue, the 3^rd respondent pretended that he is a Doctor working in a private hospital at Wayanad, which was found to be false. She conceded that she had given a statement before the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C. She expressed her desire to go along with the petitioner.

¶37

From the circumstances as mentioned above, we notice that the alleged detenue is at present staying with the petitioner. She expressed her desire to continue her stay in her parental home along with the petitioner. Under the above context, the writ petition is hereby closed. The alleged detenue is set at liberty to go along with the petitioner, as desired by her.

Sd/-

C.K.ABDUL REHIM

JUDGE

Sd/-

R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶43

JUDGE

¶44

¶45

WP(Crl.)No.345 of 2018

¶46

¶47

APPENDIX

¶48

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶49

EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 13.08.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶50

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL

¶51

//True Copy//

¶52

P.A. To Judge

¶53

Sushama v. the Circle Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushama v. the Circle Inspector of Police

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

Naseer Vs Shameera

Shan Pasha Vs the State of Kerala

Thoufeeq Vs Mufeeda

Akshara.a Vs Rohin S.Raveendran

Suresh Babu Vs Sajina

Muhammed Shafi T.M. Vs the District Police Chief