Petitioner filed habeas corpus petition claiming illegal detention of a girl before her marriage. Respondents produced her, whom she stated was staying voluntarily.
Writ petition dismissed. Alleged detenue set at liberty to go with the 6th respondent.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR
MONDAY ,THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940
WP(Crl.).No. 454 of 2018
PETITIONER:
HUNAISMOOSA,
AGED 18 YEARS, S/O. MOOSA C.M., CHALIL, PAREEKANNI P.O., KUTTAMANGALAM, PAREEKANNI, ERNAKULAM, KERALA - 686 693
BY ADVS. SRI.P.MOHAMED SABAH SRI.LIBIN STANLEY
RESPONDENTS:
WP(Crl.).No. 454 of 2018 : 2 :
8 SHAFEEK, HOUSE NO.DRA-2,ALUVA,AMBATTUKAVU PIN-683 106.
R1 TO R5 BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SRI.K.B.RAMANAND R6 TO R8 BY ADVS.SRI.SHAIJAN C.GEORGE SMT.FEMY M.ANTONY SMT.SAJITHA GEORGE
OTHER PRESENT:
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(Crl.).No. 454 of 2018 : 3 :
JUDGMENT
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J.
The petitioner is seeking a writ of Habeas corpus for directing production of the corpus of Miss.Najeesha Kareem (hereinafter referred to as 'the alleged detenue') on the basis of an allegation that she is under illegal confinement of the respondents 6 to 8.
2. It is averred in the writ petition that, the petitioner and the alleged detenue are in love and they have taken a decision to get married each other. Allegation is that, on coming to know about the relationship of the petitioner and the alleged detenue, the 6th respondent, who is the father of the alleged detenue, and the respondents 7 and 8, who are the sister and brother-in-law of
the alleged detenue, are detaining her against her
WP(Crl.).No. 454 of 2018 : 4 :
free will, without allowing to pursue her studies and without allowing her to contact the petitioner in any manner. Raising an allegation of illegal confinement, the petitioner is seeking the relief as mentioned above.
3. On receipt of notice from this Court, the respondents 6 to 8 appeared and produced the alleged detenue before this Court on today. They are also represented through a lawyer.
4. When we interacted with the alleged detenue, she conceded about her acquaintance with the petitioner. But she had emphatically denied the allegations of illegal detention. She denied the version that she has already taken a decision to marry the petitioner. According to the alleged detenue, she is now staying at her parental home on her own wish and will and there is absolutely no confinement against her free will.
5. Under the above mentioned circumstances,
WP(Crl.).No. 454 of 2018 : 5 : we do not find any basis for the allegation of illegal detention. Consequently, the writ petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. The alleged detenue is set at liberty to go along with the 6th respondent, as desired by her.
Sd/C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE Sd/T.V.ANILKUMAR JUDGE
Bb
WP(Crl.).No. 454 of 2018 : 6 :
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOGRAPH POSING THE PETITIONER AND DETENUE TOGETHER.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
EXT.R6(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER AND ITS TRANSLATION DATED 11/11/2018 EXT.R6(b) PHOTOGRAPHS
//True Copy//
P.A. To Judge
Bb
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of habeas corpus directing production of the detenue based on allegations of illegal confinement.
Whether the alleged detenue was detained against her free will by the respondents.
Whether the writ petition disclosing an allegation of illegal detention is maintainable when the detenue denies the claim.
Hunaismoosa
Najeesha Kareem
Kareem
Nadisha Shafeel
Shafek
State
C.K. Abdul Rehim
T.V. Anilkumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
