Dismissed

Arun S v. the District Police Chief

Kerala HC5 Apr 2024WP(Crl.)/359/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this habeas corpus petition, the petitioner alleged illegal detention of a woman belonging to a different religion. After interacting with the woman via video conference, the court found she was not under illegal detention and wished only for her certificates to be returned. The petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was directed to return the certificates.

Arun S Vs the District Police Chief — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT

¶2

THEHONOURABLEMR.JUSTICERAJAVIJAYARAGHAVANV
&

¶3

THEHONOURABLEMR.JUSTICEP.M.MANOJ
FRIDAY,THE5THDAYOFAPRIL2024/16THCHAITHRA,1946
WP(CRL.)NO.359OF2024

¶4

PETITIONER/S:

¶5

ARUNS,AGED23YEARS
S/O.SUNIL,ATHIRABHAVANKODUMPALLY,VAKKOM
THIRUVANANTHAPURAMDISTRICT,PIN-695308

¶6

BYADVS.
SHYNIDASJ.S.
THANUJAROSHAN
APPUAJITH

¶7

RESPONDENT/S:

¶8

1THEDISTRICTPOLICECHIEF
OFFICEOFTHEDISTRICTPOLICECHIEF,VIKASBHAVANP.O,
TRIVANDRUMDISTRICT,PIN-695033

¶9

2THESTATIONHOUSEOFFICER
KAZHAKUTTAMPOLICESTATION,TRIVANDRUMDISTRICT,
PIN-695012

¶10

3 NAZAR M K , AGED UNKNOWN, OTHER DETAILS NOT KNOWN, MANAKKATTUVILAKAM KARIYIL, KAZHAKKUTTOM PO TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT, PIN - 695582

¶11

4 SHEMI.A , AGED UNKNOWN, OTHER DETAILS NOT KNOWN, MANAKKATTUVILAKAM KARIYIL, KAZHAKKUTTOM PO TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT., PIN - 695582

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

SRI SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, SR. GP.

¶14

THISWRITPETITION(CRIMINAL)HAVINGCOMEUPFORADMISSIONON
05.04.2024,THECOURTONTHESAMEDAYDELIVEREDTHEFOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

W.P.(Crl.) No.359 of 2024

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Raja Vijayaraghavan, J.

¶19

The petitioner states that he is in love with the corpus, [‘Miss. X’ for the sake of brevity], the daughter of respondents 3 and 4. He states that since they belong to different religions, the party respondents have objected to their relationship. According to him, he has received credible information that Miss. X is illegally kept under captivity by her parents. Apprehending harm to Miss X, the petitioner is before this Court seeking directions to the official respondents to produce the corpus before this Court and to set her at liberty.

¶20

By order dated 2.4.2024, we directed the official respondents to ensure that the alleged detenu is produced before the District Legal Services Authority, Thiruvananthapuram in order enable us to interact with her through video conferencing. Directions were also issued to ensure that at the time of video conferencing, the detenu was alone.

¶21

In terms of the directions, we have interacted with the detenu for

¶22

¶23

W.P.(Crl.) No.359 of 2024

¶24

quite some time to ascertain her wishes. She states that she and the petitioner had worked in the same establishment and they were in love. However, she says that she is not under illegal detention. She states that all her certificates are with the petitioner. All that she requested was to issue directions to the petitioner to return the certificates.

¶25

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Miss Shyny Das, submitted that all the certificates shall be handed over to the Secretary, District Legal Services Authority, Thiruvananthapuram before 11.00 am on 06.04.2024.

¶26

In a petition for issue of writ of Habeas Corpus, we are primarily concerned with the question whether the alleged detenu is detained against her wish, will and desire by anyone. The correctness, prudence or wisdom of the decisions of the alleged detenu are not justiciable before the Court. The alleged detenu, as noted earlier, is an adult woman, she had already attained majority.

¶27

As she has stated before us that she is not under illegal detention, that is the end of the matter. In that view of the matter nothing further

¶28

¶29

W.P.(Crl.) No.359 of 2024

¶30

survives. The petitioner shall return the certificates as undertaken.

¶31

This writ petition is closed.

¶32

sd/-

¶33

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

JUDGE

sd/-

P.M.MANOJ

JUDGE

das

W.P.(Crl.) No.359 of 2024

¶41

APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) 359/2024

¶42

`PETITION`	`ER EXHIBITS`
`Exhibit`	`P1`	`A TRUE` `CARD`	`COPY`	`OF`	`THE`	`PETITIONER`	`EMPLOYM`	`E`	`NT ID`
`Exhibit`	`P2`	`A TRUE` `AND DET`	`COPY` `ENUEE,`	`OF` `DA`	`THE` `TED`	`PHOTOS OF` `NILL`	`THE PETI`	`T`	`IONER`
`Exhibit`	`P3`	`A` `TRUE` `MESSAGE`	`COPY` `OF TH`	`OF` `E D`	`THE` `ETEN`	`SCREENSHO` `UEE TO THE`	`T` `OF` `TH` `PETITION`	`E` `E`	`LAST` `R`
`Exhibit`	`P4`	`A` `TRUE` `PETITIO`	`COPY` `NER DA`	`OF` `TED`	`THE` `25/`	`COMPLAINT` `03/2024`	`FILED`	`B`	`Y` `THE`
`Exhibit`	`P5`	`A` `TRUE` `25/03/2`	`COPY` `024`	`OF`	`TH`	`E` `POSTAL`	`RECEIPT`		`DATED`

¶43

¶44

W.P.(Crl.) No.359 of 2024

Arun S v. the District Police Chief

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun S 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

Dr.Dilna.M Vs Dr.P.Sarat Chandran

Surendran K.P. Vs Sathi N.B.

Joseph Joseph Vs Miriam Tina Francis

Shibin S.B Vs District Police Chief

Muhammed Shafeekhan S Vs State of Kerala

Sudha Kumari P.K Vs the City Police Commissioner