← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(Crl.)/68/2015closed

Aravind L.S. v. The State Police Chief

2015-02-19Honourable Mr. Justice A.V.Ramakrishna Pillai,Honourable Mr.Justice V.K.Mohanan6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/30TH MAGHA, 1936 WP(Crl.).No. 68 of 2015 (S) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:

-------------------------- ARAVIND L.S. AGED 30 YEARS S/O.SUNDARAN NADAR, L S BHAVAN, POTTAKUZHI PLAMOOTTUKADA P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695122 BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:

------------------------------

1. THE STATE POLICE CHIEF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695010.

2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.

3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695002.

4. LATHIKA KUMARI VANISREE, T C 21/994-1, NEDUMCADU KARAMANA P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695002.

5. ANOOP VANISREE, T C 21/994-1, NEDUMCADU KARAMANA P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695002.

R4,R5 BY ADV. SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR R4,R5 BY ADV. SRI.A.K.RAJESH R4,R5 BY ADV. SRI.VENKATESH GOPI R1-R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.KOCHUMOL KODUVATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(Crl.).No. 68 of 2015 (S) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------- P1:-TRUE COPY OF THE MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE TEMPLE SECRETARY, VAIKAI KALI AMMAN COIL, MATHOOR, KANYAKUMARI DIST. P2:-TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD 10/2/2015 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE ami/

V.K.MOHANAN & A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JJ.

------------------------------- ------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of February, 2015.

J U D G M E N T

Mohanan, J.

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner alleging that one Reshma Chandran, who is the daughter of the 4th respondent, is under the illegal confinement of respondents 4 and 5, since they are against the affair between the petitioner and the said Reshma Chandran. According to the petitioner, he had studied BHMS Course at White Memorial Homoeo Medical College, Attoor, Kanyakumari District, Tamilnadu and after completing and passing the course, he got appointed as Medical Officer in the same college. It is the further case of the petitioner that, while he was studying in that college, the petitioner got acquainted with the alleged detenue Reshma Chandran, who was a student of the very same college and at present she is studying final year BHMS Course. According to the petitioner, the

acquaintance between them became intimate to each other and they fell in love. However, the petitioner belongs to Hindu Nadar community and the alleged detenue belongs to Nair caste. It is the further case of the petitioner that when the 4th and 5th respondents came to know about the affair between the petitioner and the said Reshma Chandran, they raised objection against the marriage with the petitioner and ignoring their objection, the petitioner and the alleged detenue married at Vaikai Kali Amman Coil, Mathoor, Kanyakumari District, on 6.2.2015. To substantiate the above claim Ext.P1 is produced. According to the petitioner, after the marriage, the alleged detenue Reshma Chandran informed her mother about the marriage and thereafter his wife was put under illegal confinement of respondents 4 and 5 and they took her to some unknown place. So, he was forced to file Ext.P2 petition before the 3rd respondent, but no action was taken and therefore he preferred the above writ petition with a prayer to issue a writ of habeas corpus commanding the respondents to

produce the body of Reshma Chandran (the detenue) before this Court and set her free along with the petitioner.

2. In pursuance of the order dated 13.2.2015, whereby this Court directed respondents 4 and 5 to appear in person before this Court and produce the alleged detenue Reshma Chandran, she is produced before us today. We have interacted with the alleged detenue Reshma Chandran and heard both the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents 4 and 5.

3. During our interaction with the detenue, she submitted before us that she knows the petitioner only as her senior student and she has also submitted that she is not under the illegal confinement of anybody including respondents 4 and 5. In a proceedings where the allegation is that the so called detenue is under the illegal confinement of somebody, the question to be ascertained is whether such allegation is correct or not. In the present case, the detenue herself appeared before us and deposed that she is not under the illegal confinement of anybody. If

that be so, no further orders are warranted in terms of the relief sought for in this writ petition.

In the result, we find no merit in this original petition and accordingly the same is closed, in the light of the deposition made by the daughter of the 4th respondent Reshma Chandran.

Sd/- V.K.MOHANAN, Judge Sd/- A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, Judge ami/ //True copy// P.A.to Judge