Kerala High Court
Balasubrahmanyan vs Ci Of Police on 3 August, 2012
Author: K.T.Sankaran
Bench: K.T.Sankaran, M.L.Joseph Francis
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS
FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST 2012/12TH SRAVANA 1934
WP(Crl.).No. 297 of 2012 (S)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
-------------
BALASUBRAHMANYAN, AGED 49,
S/O.KARAPPAN, KARIMBANAKKAL HOUSE, ATHAVANAD (PO)
TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.T.K.SAIDALIKUTTY
SRI.M.I.JOHNSON
SRI.T.K.MOIDEEN KUTTY
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. CI OF POLICE
TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.676 505.
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
VALANCHERY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.676 505.
3. MOHAMED HASSAN @ AMNAS, AGED 21 YEARS
S/O.HAMSA, KALLUVETTIKKAL HOUSE, KODAKKAL (PO)
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.676 505.
4. STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO HOME
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN-695 001.
BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW
BY ADDL. D.G.P. SRI.TOM JOSE PADINJAREKKARA.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03-
08-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(Crl.).No. 297 of 2012 (S)
A P P E N D I X
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :
EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE CRIME NO.316/2012 REGISTERED BY THE
VALANCHERY POLICE, MALAPPURAM.
TGS (TRUE COPY)
K.T.SANKARAN & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P.(Crl) No.297 of 2012
-----------------------------------------------
Dated 3rd August, 2012.
J U D G M E N T
K.T.Sankaran, J.
The petitioner is the father of Sowmya, aged 19 years. She was studying in a parallel college. The petitioner states that on 9.6.2012, the girl went to the college, but she did not return. It is alleged that the girl is in the illegal custody of the third respondent Mohamed Hassan @ Amnas. It is also alleged that the third respondent is an active member of NDF. According to the petitioner, NDF is considered as an extremist association.
2. When the case was posted on 26.6.2012, we passed a detailed order, the relevant portion of which is extracted below :
"2. Today, the girl, her father and the third respondent are present before Court. We interacted with them.
3. The girl stated that on 9.6.2012, she went along with the third respondent and they went to Bangalore. They stayed in a lodge till 17.6.2012. She stated that they had sexual relationship. On 18.6.2012, they appeared before the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Tirur and they were allowed to go on their own. She also stated that at present she is staying in an W.P.(Crl) 297/12 2 institution called 'Sathyasarani Religious Educational Institute', Manjeri. She stated that religious instructions on Islam is being imparted in the institution and that she is provided with four books on the subject. We enquired about the details regarding the institute. She stated that there are separate hostels for boys and girls. She also stated that there are about 30 girls in the hostel belonging to other religions, who are undergoing religious instructions.
4. On an interaction with the third respondent, he also stated that he took the girl to Bangalore and stayed in a lodge. He does not know the name of the lodge. He does not know how much rent was paid. He did not disclose as to who instructed him to appear before the Magistrate's Court, Tirur. He stated that there was no sexual relationship between him and the girl.
5. The third respondent also stated that he went with the girl to Maunathil Islam, Ponnani for converting the girl to Islam, but they returned from that place as the third respondent thought that it was not safe there and there was no sufficient cleanliness. Thereafter, the girl was admitted at Sathyasarani Religious Educational Institute at Manjeri and she is staying there. He stated that he is prepared to marry her provided she converts to Islam.
x x x x x x
7. The petitioner was allowed to talk to his daughter for about half an hour. He stated that his daughter is at present in Sathyasarani Religious Educational Institute at Manjeri as stated by her. The petitioner stated that he is a coolie. He stated that he is helpless. He lamented that he has lost his daughter. At the W.P.(Crl) 297/12 3 same time, he added that let the Court be also concerned about 42 girls who were missing in and around Manjeri in similar circumstances and who were admitted in the religious institution referred to above.
8. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the alleged detenue is thoroughly confused and that she is not giving rational answers to the questions put forward by the Court. Practically she knows nothing about conversion to another religion, is the impression gathered by us on interacting with her. Prima facie, we are of the view that the girl is not capable of taking independent decisions in the circumstances. Therefore, we are inclined to direct Sowmya to be admitted in Santhinikethan hostel, Near Lourdes Hospital, Pachalam. The petitioner agreed that he will bear the necessary expenses for the stay of Sowmya in the hostel. He added that till she attained 19 years, he had maintained her and for a few days also, he could manage to maintain her."
Thereafter, the girl is staying in Santhinikethan Hostel. On 4.7.2012, as agreed by Sowmya (the alleged detenue) and her father, we passed an order directing Sowmya to execute the necessary document relinquishing her rights in the residential property in which Sowmya's parents are residing. Sowmya was taken out of the hostel for the purpose of registration of the document on 23.7.2012. The document was registered by her W.P.(Crl) 297/12 4 on 23.7.2012.
3. On 26.7.2012, we passed an order directing Sowmya and Mohamed Hassan to furnish all the relevant information regarding the issue of notice under the Special Marriage Act and the case was directed to be posted to 3.8.2012.
4. Today, Mohamed Hassan appeared before Court. He stated that notice under the Special Marriage Act was given on 27.7.2012 and that marriage can be registered on 27.8.2012 before the Marriage Officer, Kuttippuram.
5. As per the order dated 26.7.2012, we had taken the view that Sowmya cannot be sent along with Mohammed Hassan, unless and until their marriage is registered under the Special Marriage Act and that Sowmya shall continue to stay in the hostel. Since the notice was given under the Special Marriage Act and since it is stated that the marriage can be solemnized on 27.8.2012, we dispose of the Writ Petition (Criminal) with the following directions :
(a) Sowmya shall continue to stay in Santhinikethan Hostel, Near Lourdes Hospital, Pachalam, till 27.8.2012. W.P.(Crl) 297/12 5
(b) On 27.8.2012, Sowmya shall be taken to Kuttippuram, in order to appear before the Marriage Officer, Kuttippuram. If the marriage between Sowmya and Mohamed Hassan is registered on that day, they would be free to go to any place of their choice. If the marriage is not registered, Sowmya shall be brought back to Santhinekthan Hostel. For taking Sowmya to Kuttippuram on 27.8.2012, sufficient police assistance shall be made available.
(c) All the expenses for the stay of Sowmya in the hostel shall be met by Mohamed Hassan.
(d) After registering the marriage, the Certificate of Marriage shall be produced for perusal of the Court on 14.9.2012.
Sd/-
K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE.
Sd/-
M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE.
(true copy) tgs