Dismissed

Jessy Sunil v. the Circle Inspector of Police

Kerala HC26 Nov 2018WP(Crl.)/455/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this habeas corpus petition, the mother sought production of her adult daughter allegedly illegally detained for marriage. The daughters and parents produced her, who stated she left freely with consent to marry with a minor respondent. Finding no illegal detention, the court dismissed the petition. No issues to the law were raised.

What did the court decide?

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

Jessy Sunil Vs the Circle Inspector of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | 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 T.V.ANILKUMAR

¶6

MONDAY ,THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶7

WP(Crl.).No. 455 of 2018

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

JESSY SUNIL, AGED 42 YEARS, W/O.LATE SUNIL, ROSHNI COTTAGE, MEKKAD, CHAVARA P.O., KOLLAM.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.SAJU J PANICKER

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHAVARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM, PIN-691 583

¶13

2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHAVARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM, PIN-691 583

¶14

3 JACKSON LAWRENCE, AGED 23 YEARS, S/O.LAWRENCE, PHILOMINA COTTAGE, MEKKAD, CHAVARA P.O., KOLLAM-691583.

¶15

4 AMMINI LAWRENCE, AGED 45 YEARS, W/O.LAWRENCE, PHILOMINA COTTAGE, MEKKAD, CHAVARA P.O., KOLLAM-691583.

¶16

R1 & R2 BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SRI. K.B.RAMANAND R3 & R4 BY ADV.SRI.AJAYA KUMAR.G

¶17

OTHER PRESENT:

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(Crl.).No. 455 of 2018 : 2 :

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J.

¶22

Mother of a girl named Miss.Roshni Sunil(hereinafter referred to as 'the alleged detenue') is the petitioner herein, seeking a writ of Habeas corpus for commanding production of the corpus of the alleged detenue and to set her at liberty, based on an allegation raised that the respondents 3 and 4 are illegally detaining her, against her free will.

¶23

2. It is stated in the writ petition that, the husband of the petitioner, who is the father of the alleged detenue, died earlier and the alleged detenue is studying for her degree course and she had completed the age of 19 years. The alleged detenue is missing since 7.11.2018, as she had not returned home after attending the college

¶24

WP(Crl.).No. 455 of 2018 : 3 :

¶25

to write the first semester degree examinations.

¶26

On the basis of a complaint lodged by the petitioner, the 2^nd respondent had registered Ext.P1 Crime under Section 57 of the Kerala Police Act. Enquiries made by the petitioner had revealed that, the alleged detenue is in the custody of the 3^rd respondent. The 4^th respondent is the mother of the 3^rd respondent. Raising allegations that the respondents 3 and 4 are keeping the alleged detenue under illegal custody against her free will, the above writ petition is filed.

¶27

3. On receipt of notice from this Court, the respondents 3 and 4 appeared and produced the alleged detenue before this Court, on today. The respondents 3 and 4 are also represented through a lawyer.

¶28

4. When we interacted with the alleged detenue she said that she had completed the age of 19 years and is studying in the first year of

¶29

WP(Crl.).No. 455 of 2018 : 4 :

¶30

degree course. According to her, she had gone along with the 3^rd respondent on 7.11.2018 because of the deep intimacy with him and on the basis of their decision to get married each other. It is said that, since then they are staying together at the house of the mother's sister of the 3^rd respondent. It is stated that they have appeared before the 2^nd respondent, on getting information about registration of Ext.P1 case and that she was

¶31

produced before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chavara on 9.11.2018. The Magistrate had set her at liberty to go along with the 3^rd respondent, as per the desire expressed by her. The alleged detenue had emphatically denied the allegations of illegal detention. She said that she is now staying along with the 3^rd respondent on her own wish and will and that they are taking steps to get their marriage solemnized under the religious rites and custom. It was

¶32

WP(Crl.).No. 455 of 2018 : 5 : undertaken on behalf of respondents 3 and 4 also

¶33

that a valid marriage will be solemnized between the alleged detenue and the 3^rd respondent, shortly.

¶34

5. From the circumstances mentioned as above, we are convinced that there is no element of illegal detention. It is evident that the alleged detenue is staying with the 3^rd respondent on her own wish and will and on the basis that they are intending to get married each other.

¶35

6. Under the above mentioned circumstances, we do not find any ground to invoke the jurisdiction vested on this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Consequently, the 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.

¶36

This Court takes on record the undertaking

¶37

WP(Crl.).No. 455 of 2018 : 6 : made by the respondents 3 and 4 that a valid marriage will be solemnized between the 3^rd respondent and the alleged detenue, at the earliest possible.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

¶40

WP(Crl.).No. 455 of 2018 : 7 :

¶41

APPENDIX

¶42

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶43

EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.1273 OF 2018 OF CHAVARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM.

¶44

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

NIL

//True Copy//

P.A. To Judge

Jessy Sunil v. the Circle Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jessy Sunil 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Wolter Antony Harrison Vs Agnus Harrison

Anilkumar Vs Treesa

Anootha Chandran Vs D.B.R Prabhu

Deepu.R.Darsan @ Archana Raj, Vs Prakashan

Hunaismoosa, Vs the State Police Chief Police

Navaf Vs Shima