Dismissed

Dileep Steephan, v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Kerala HC9 Nov 2018WP(Crl.)/434/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a Habeas Corpus writ seeking production of his wife, alleged to be in illegal confinement by the third respondent. The Court found the wife was absconding to evade arrest in a criminal case rather than being illegally confined. The writ petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Writ of Habeas Corpus dismissed as no material exists to presume illegal confinement; petitioner's remedy sought alternative to this writ.

Dileep Steephan, Vs the Sub Inspector of Police — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2018)

¶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 T.V.ANILKUMAR

¶5

FRIDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1940

¶6

WP(Crl.).No. 434 of 2018

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

DILEEP STEEPHAN, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O. J. STEEPHANOSE, THEVARATHALAVILAKAM, KUTTIKKATTUKARA P.O., ELOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 501.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR SMT.BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN SMT.T.J.SEEMA

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ELOOR POLICE STATION, ELOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 501.

¶12

2 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KALAMASSERY POLICE STATION, KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM-683 104.

¶13

3 DELSON.M.V., S/O.VINCENT, MADAVANA HOUSE, NEAR GURUDEVA STATUE, PANAYIKULAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683 502.

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SR.GP.SRI.K.B.RAMANAND

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

-:2:-

¶18

W.P.(Crl) No. 434/2018

¶19

C.K. ABDUL REHIM &

¶20

T.V. ANILKUMAR, JJ.

¶21

-----------------------------------------------------

¶22

W.P.(Crl) No. 434 OF 2018 S

¶23

-------------------------------------------------------

¶24

Dated this the 9^th day of November, 2018

¶25

J U D G M E N T

¶26

Abdul Rehim, J.

¶27

Husband of a lady named Mrs.Aiswarya Abraham, is the petitioner herein, seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus for commanding production of the corpus of Mrs.Aiswarya Abraham(hereinafter referred to as 'the alleged detenue') and to

¶28

set her at liberty, by raising an allegation that she is under illegal confinement of the 3^rd respondent.

¶29

It is stated in the writ petition that, marriage between the petitioner and the alleged detenue was solemnized on 22.11.2017 and a girl child, now aged six years, was born out of the said wedlock. The alleged detenue is presently employed

¶30

as an Auditor in the State Co-operative Department. The 3^rd respondent is stated to be an auto-rickshaw driver working in

¶31

W.P.(Crl) No. 434/2018 -:3:-

¶32

the area of Kalamassery. It is stated in the writ petition about the the illicit relationship developed between the alleged detenue and the 3^rd respondent, with respect to which, the petitioner lodged a complaint before the police authorities. According to the petitioner, the issues were amicably settled at the intervention of the police and the alleged detenue had agreed to continue cohabitation with the petitioner. On 25.10.2018, in the afternoon, when the petitioner went to Kakkanad for picking up the alleged detenue from her office, he found the alleged detenue coming in the auto-rickshaw of the 3^rd respondent. When the petitioner tried to intercept the autorickshaw, the 3^rd respondent knocked down him with the autorickshaw thereby causing grievous injuries. He took the alleged detenue in the said auto-rickshaw to some unknown place. It is stated that, based on a complaint lodged by the petitioner, a case was registered with respect to the said incident, as Crime No.1381/2018 of the Thrikkakara Police Station. It is further stated that the petitioner had submitted Ext.P1 complaint before

¶33

W.P.(Crl) No. 434/2018 -:4:-

¶34

the 1^st respondent with respect to abduction of the alleged detenue by the 3^rd respondent. Alleging that the police authorities are not taking any effective action to get the alleged detenue released from the illegal confinement of the 3^rd respondent, the above writ petition is filed.

¶35

When the case came up for admission on 02.11.18, this court directed the 1^st respondent to conduct an enquiry into the allegations of illegal confinement and to submit a report before this court. Today, the learned Government Pleader had produced a report submitted by the 1^st respondent. It is revealed that, the petitioner had submitted a complaint before the 1^st respondent as early as in the month of August, 2018, complaining about the illicit relationship of the alleged detenue with the 3^rd respondent. All the parties were summoned to the Police Station and the issue was amicably settled by directing the alleged detenue to live together with the petitioner along with their daughter. Thereafter, on 25.10.2018, a case was registered at the Kalamassery Police Station as Crime

¶36

W.P.(Crl) No. 434/2018 -:5:-

¶37

No.1829/2018 for offences punishable under Sections 308 and 326 read with Section 34 of IPC against the 3^rd respondent and the alleged detenue, as accused Nos.1 and 2 respectively, based on the statement of the petitioner, with respect to the incident in which hurt was caused to the petitioner by knocking down with the auto-rickshaw driven by the 3^rd respondent. The said case was transferred subsequently to Thrikkakara Police Station and it was re-registered as Crime No.1381/2018. In the report of the first respondent it is mentioned that, the alleged detenue is absconding for evading police arrest in Crime No.1381/2018. It is further mentioned that, she had filed an application seeking anticipatory bail in the said case, before the District and Sessions Court, Ernakulam, as Crl.M.C.No.2155/2018. According to the 1^st respondent, the alleged detenue is absconding for evading arrest in the above said case.

¶38

From the factual circumstances narrated as above, it is evident that the alleged detenue had left the company of the

¶39

W.P.(Crl) No. 434/2018

¶40

-:6:-

¶41

petitioner on 25.10.2018 along with the 3^rd respondent. At present, she is absconding evading arrest in the case in which she is implicated as the 2^nd accused. There is no materials available to presume in any manner that the alleged detenue is being illegally confined by the 3^rd respondent against her free will. Therefore, there exists no circumstances warranting interference of this court for issuing a writ of Habeas Corpus. Consequently, the writ petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed.

¶42

It is made clear that the above judgment will not stand in the way of the petitioner seeking appropriate remedy for redressal of his grievances arising out of the matrimonial disputes. It will also not prevent the police authorities in taking appropriate action against the 3^rd respondent or against the alleged detenue in the case registered against them.

¶43

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

¶44

Sd/- T.V. ANILKUMAR, JUDGE .

¶45

ul/-

¶46

[True copy] P.S. to Judge.

¶47

-:7:-

¶48

W.P.(Crl) No. 434/2018

¶49

APPENDIX

¶50

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶51

EXHIBIT P1

¶52

TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BNFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 30.10.2018.

Dileep Steephan, v. the Sub Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dileep Steephan, v. the Sub 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

Govindaraj Vs Vidya

Amal Ravi Vs State of Kerala

Tony Jose Vs Jerin Jose @ Aley

Abdul Rahim Vs Nazeema Beevi

Leo Zacharias Vs the Director General of Police

Reghu M Vs Nandhini C