Dismissed

Akshay Mukund P.V. v. the District Police Chief

Kerala HC8 Oct 2018WP(Crl.)/393/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition for habeas corpus alleging illegal detention of the petitioner's love interest by her family, the High Court rejected the claim. After the involved family member produced the girl with the Court, she stated she was living at her parental home by choice and denied any confinement. The Court dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed. The alleged detenue is set at liberty to go along with the 3rd respondent.

Akshay Mukund P.V. Vs the District… — 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

MONDAY ,THE 08TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 16TH ASWINA, 1940

¶7

WP(Crl.).No. 393 of 2018

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

AKSHAY MUKUND P.V. AGED 21 YEARS S/O MUKUNDAN, PATHIRA VALAPPIL HOUSE, PONNANI P.O, CHAMRAVATTOM JUNCTION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.P.U.SHAILAJAN SMT.D.N.NISHANI SRI.M.SURESH KUMAR SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE SRI.V.SREEJITH (K/1398/2000)

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF MALAPPURAM - 676505.

¶13

2 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676101.

¶14

3 SREEJA W/O. VIJAYAN, THALAPPIL HOUSE, CHAMRAVATTOM P.O., TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676102.

¶15

BY ADV. SURYA BINOY

¶16

R1 & R2 BY SR GP. SRI. K.B.RAMANAND

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WP(Crl.).No. 393 of 2018

JUDGMENT

Abdul Rehim, J

The petitioner is approaching this court raising an allegation that Miss.Sneha Vijayan, who is the daughter of the 3^rd respondent, with whom the petitioner is in love, is being illegally detained against her free will. Based on the said

¶23

allegation, the petitioner is seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus for commanding production of the corpus of Miss.Sneha Vijayan (hereinafter referred

¶24

to as 'the alleged detenue') and to set her at liberty.

¶25

2. It is averred in the writ petition that the petitioner and the alleged detenue are in love for the last more than 5 years and they have taken a decision to get married. On coming to know about their relationship, the 3^rd respondent and other family members are keeping the alleged detenue under confinement without allowing the petitioner to contact the alleged detenue in any manner. It is

¶26

WP(Crl.).No. 393 of 2018

¶27

¶28

alleged that she is kept under illegal confinement against her free will. It is also alleged that the detenue is not allowed to go to her college and that her parents are now taking steps to conduct her

¶29

marriage with somebody else, against her consent. Based on the above allegations, the petitioner is seeking reliefs as mentioned above.

¶30

3. Pursuant to notice issued from this court, the 3^rd respondent appeared and produced the alleged detenue on today. The 3^rd respondent is also represented through a lawyer. When we interacted

¶31

with the alleged detenue, she said that she is studying for 3^rd year B.C.A degree and she had completed the age of 20years. She confessed about

¶32

the intimacy developed with the petitioner. But according to her, she has not taken any decision with respect to her marriage, at present. She had expressed her intention to continue her studies. She had emphatically denied the allegations of illegal confinement by her family members. She said that she

¶33

is living at her parental home on her own wish and

¶34

WP(Crl.).No. 393 of 2018

¶35

¶36

will. She also expressed her desire to go back to the parental house.

¶37

Under the above mentioned circumstances, we do not find any basis for the allegations of illegal confinement. Consequently, the above writ petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. The alleged detenue is set at liberty to go along with the 3^rd respondent, as desired by her.

¶38

Sd/-C.K. ABDUL REHIM, Judge

¶39

Sd/-R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, Judge

¶40

lsn

¶41

TRUE COPY

¶42

P.A TO JUDGE

Akshay Mukund P.V. v. the District Police Chief

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akshay Mukund P.V. v. the District Police Chief

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

Shaji Mathew P.M. Vs Leena R. Abraham

Guru Deeksha Vs Abhirami Prasad

Kannan M.K. Vs Unnikrishnan Nair

Anil Kumar G Vs Sindhu G R

Vikraman Nair Vs Aishwarya

Usman K.A Vs State of Kerala