Petitioner filed a habeas corpus petition seeking release of a detainee whom he claimed was held against her will. Police produced the detainee before the court, who denied unlawful custody. The High Court dismissed the petition.
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 K.HARILAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 28TH KARTHIKA, 1941
WP(Crl.).No.394 OF 2019
PETITIONER:
BASIL PAULOSE
AGED 22 YEARS S/O. P.P. PAULOSE, PARAYIL HOUSE, NORTH KIDANGOOR, KIDANGOOR PIN-683572.
BY ADV. SRI.BIBIN KUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 P.D.JOSE AGED 55 YEARS PUTHUSSERY HOUSE, AMALAPURAM, AYYAMPUZHA, PIN-683581.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER R1 BY ADV. SRI.FIROZ K.ROBIN R1 BY ADV. SRI.PIOUS MATHEW R1 BY ADV. SRI.ROY JOSEPH R1 BY ADV. SMT.ANIES MATHEW R1 BY ADV. SRI.E.HARIDAS
R2-4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER
OTHER PRESENT:
GP --K B RAMANAND .
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Wpcrl.394/2019
2
JUDGMENT
K.Harilal, J.
1.The petitioner herein has approached this court seeking a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents 2 and 3 to produce the detenue before this court and set her free. According to him, the petitioner and the alleged detenue were in love for the last more than six years and they have decided to get married at the earliest. Pursuant to that they have issued Ext.P2 notice of intended marriage, under section 5 of the Special Marriage Act. When the first respondent, the father of the alleged
Wpcrl.394/2019
3
detenue, came to know the proposed marriage under Ext.P2, he has confined her to his unlawful custody and thereafter the detenue has been under his unlawful detention.
2.In compliance with the interim order of this
court, the detenue has been produced before this court and we have interacted with the detenue. She admitted the love affair between herself and the petitioner and the issuance of Ext.P2 notice. She denied the allegation that she is under the unlawful detention of the first respondent. According to her, the first respondent has not imposed any kind of restriction on her free and independent life.
3.In view of the statement made before us, we are satisfied that the detenue is not under the
Wpcrl.394/2019
4
unlawful detention of the first respondent, as alleged in the writ petition. There is no circumstance warranting invocation of writ jurisdiction, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
4.The writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
K.HARILAL
JUDGE
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS
JUDGE
sl.
Wpcrl.394/2019
5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PETITIONER AND THE DETENUE.
EXHIBIT P2
A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FORM FOR MARRIAGE ISSUED FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION.
/true copy/
PS TO JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the alleged detenu is under unlawful custody of the respondent and requires release.
Whether writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is warranted to set the alleged detenu free.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Basil Paulose
P.D.Jose
The Sub Inspector of Police
The Circle Inspector of Police
The Superintendent of Police
K.Harilal
C.S.Dias
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
