Latha v. Sub Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.D.RAJAN FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/24TH MAGHA, 1936 WP(Crl.).No. 528 of 2014 (S) PETITIONER:
LATHA, AGED 45 YEARS W/O.VIJAYAN, 'KALLAYITHADATHIL HOUSE'
KANNAMVETTIKKAVU P.O.-673 637, PULIKKAL VIA, KONDOTTY MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.C.K.MOHANAN RESPONDENTS:
1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KONDOTTY POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT PIN-673 638.
2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-673 638.
3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE MALAPPURAM, PIN-676 505.
4. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (LAW AND ORDER) POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, TRIVANDRUM-695 001.
5. SHABEEB, AGED 24 YEARS S/O.GAFOOR, POOKKATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, NEAR MADRASSA AYIKKARAPADI P.O.-673 637, PULIKKAL VIA, KONDOTTY MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
6. GAFOOR, AGED 55 YEARS POOKKATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, NEAR MADRASSA AYIKKARAPADI P.O.-673 637, PULIKKAL VIA, KONDOTTY MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
R6 BY ADV. SRI.J.ABHILASH R1 TO R4 BY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION SRI.ASAF ALI R5 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MOHAMED JAMEEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
K.T.SANKARAN & P.D.RAJAN, JJ.
---------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13 th day of February, 2015
JUDGMENT
K.T.Sankaran, J.
The Writ Petition was taken up before lunch. We interacted with the parties. The petitioner was also provided opportunity to interact with her daughter Divya (the alleged detenue). Divya stated that she did not want to go with her mother and that she wanted to have a marital relationship with the fifth respondent. Since Divya and fifth respondent belong to different religions, we directed Divya to stay in Santhinikethan Hostel, Pachalam so as to enable both parties to register the marriage under the Special Marriage Act.
2. After lunch (at 2.45 P.M.), the petitioner and her daughter Divya came to the Court and stated that Divya changed her mind and agreed to go with the petitioner, instead of going to the hostel. Divya also stated that she does not want to marry the fifth respondent. The fifth respondent was available in the Court and he was given an opportunity to interact with Divya. Even thereafter,
:: 2 ::
Divya stated that she wants to go with her mother.
3. The case of the petitioner in the Writ Petition is that Divya was staying with her and on 15.12.2014 she did not return home. On enquiry it was revealed that the fifth respondent abducted Divya in an autorickshaw. The petitioner alleged that Divya was under the illegal detention of the fifth respondent.
4. When the Writ Petition was taken up for hearing on 12.2.2015, a counsel appeared for the fifth respondent and he stated that the fifth respondent and Divya would appear before Court on 13.2.2015. Accordingly, the case was posted to 13.2.2015. The incidents narrated above took place on 13.2.2015.
5. In view of the change of attitude of Divya and in view of her specific stand that she wants to go with her mother, the only conclusion that could be arrived at is that Divya should be permitted to go with her mother. The fifth respondent has no valid relationship with Divya and therefore, under law, he cannot claim for any right to
:: 3 ::
maintain Divya or to request that Divya should stay with him. Accordingly, the Writ Petition (Criminal) is allowed and Divya is permitted to go with her mother. The order passed by us directing Divya to be admitted in Santhinikethan Hostel is hereby cancelled. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge (P.D.RAJAN) Judge ahz/