Jithish.P.V v. The District Police Chief
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/4TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(Crl.).No. 118 of 2015 (S) ----------------------------- PETITIONER:
-------------------------- JITHISH.P.V S/O.VENUGOPALAN, PULIMKUZHI HOUSE, MULAYAM KOOTALA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN -680 652. BY ADV. SRI.MAHESH V.MENON RESPONDENTS:
----------------------------
1. THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF THRISSUR - 680001.
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE MANNUTHY POLICE STATION, MANNUTHY THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680003.
3. SUBASH FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER THUNDATHIL HOUSE, MULAYAM, KOOTALA P.O.
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680 652.
R-R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.B.GANGESH BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.KOCHUMOL KODUVETH THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25-032015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.N.RAVINDRAN & ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JJ.
--------------------------- W.P.(Crl.) No.118 of 2015 -------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of March, 2015
J U D G M E N T
P.N.Ravindran, J.
The petitioner who claims to be in love with the third respondent's daughter Saranya Subash has filed this writ petition for a writ of habeas corpus commanding respondents 1 and 2 to produce the body of the detenue in this Court and to set her at liberty forthwith. It is alleged that he and the detenue are in love and that they intend to marry and live together as husband and wife. The petitioner has also alleged the detenue is under the illegal custody of the third respondent.
2. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the third respondent appeared and produced his daughter in this Court. We interacted with the petitioner, the third respondent, his wife and the detenue. During the course of the interaction, the detenue stated that she is not under the illegal custody of her parents and that she would like to go with her parents. The detenue as well as her parents also submitted that she is being harassed by the petitioner. Though the petitioner stated that he would like to interact with the detenue,
W.P.(Crl.) No.118/2015 the detenue declined to interact. In such circumstances, as the detenue has in categorical terms admitted that she has no intention to go with the petitioner and she is willing to go with her parents and also expressed her desire not to interact with the petitioner and has further stated that the petitioner is harassing her, we are of the opinion that the relief prayed for in the instant writ petition cannot be granted. The writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) ANIL K.NARENDRAN, (JUDGE) vps