Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Mebin R vs The State Police Chief on 22 October, 2018

Author: C.K.Abdul Rehim

Bench: C.K.Abdul Rehim

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                 PRESENT

                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM

                                     &

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

      MONDAY,THE 22ND DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 30TH ASWINA, 1940

                        WP(Crl.).No. 408 of 2018


PETITIONER/S:

                MEBIN R
                AGED 23 YEARS
                S/O.ROBINSON, PULIKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, THOPPUMPADI P.O,
                KOCHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682005.

                BY ADVS.
                JUSTIN JACOB
                SMT.A.P.BEELAMMA
                SRI.K.S.ARUN KUMAR
                SMT.RESMI THOMAS


RESPONDENT/S:
       1      THE STATE POLICE CHIEF
              STATE POLICE HEADQUARTERS, VELLAYAMBALAM,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695010.

      2         STATION HOUSE OFFICER
                MALA POLICE STATION, MALA, THRISSUR, KERALA 680732.

      3         NAJU
                AGED 47 YEARS
                W/O NAZZAR, AYYARIL HOSUE, ANNAMANADA P.O., THRISSUR
                DISTRICT-680741.

      R1 & R2   SR.GP.SRI.K.B.RAMANAND
                BY ADVS.
                SRI.K.M.FIROZ
                SMT.M.SHAJNA


THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
22.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(Crl.).No. 408 of 2018

                                     2

                               JUDGMENT

Abdul Rehim, J The petitioner has approached this court seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus for commanding production of the copus of'Miss. Husnuban', who is the daughter of the 3 rd respondent, and to set her at liberty, by raising an allegation that the 3 rd respondent is illegally detaining her against her free will.

2. It is stated in the writ petition that, the petitioner is working in a private Eye Hospital at Ernakulam and he fell in love with Miss. Husnuban (hereinafter referred to as 'the alleged detenue'), who was doing her internship in Optometry in the said hospital. When the 3rd respondent came to know about their relationship, another marriage was fixed for the alleged detenue, without her consent. Then the alleged detenue came to Kochi by leaving her parental home, after writing a letter as per Ext.P1, in order to get rid of the marriage fixed without her consent. But the 3rd respondent contacted the alleged detenue and took her back to home based on the promise given that necessary arrangements will be made for her marriage with the petitioner. Believing the words of the 3rd respondent, the alleged detenue went back to her parental home. But thereafter the petitioner WP(Crl.).No. 408 of 2018 3 could not contact her since her mobile phone remained switched off. According to the petitioner, she made a request to save her from the illegal custody of the 3 rd respondent. Even though the petitioner made attempts to contact her, the 3 rd respondent had not permitted the petitioner to interfere. Hence, alleging that the detenue is under illegal confinement, the above writ petition is filed.

3. On receipt of notice from this court, the 3 rd respondent appeared through lawyer and produced the alleged detenue before this court on today. When we interacted with the alleged detenue, she conceded about her acquaintance with the petitioner. But she said that, she had not taken any decision to marry the petitioner. According to her, she is now staying in the parental home along with her family members on her own wish and will. She denied the allegations of illegal detention. She expressed her desire to go back along with the 3 rd respondent to her parental home.

Under the above mentioned circumstances, this court do not find any basis for the allegations of illegal confinement. Consequently, the writ petition fails and same is hereby dismissed. The alleged detenue is set at liberty to go along with WP(Crl.).No. 408 of 2018 4 the 3rd respondent, as desired by her.

Sd/-C.K. ABDUL REHIM, Judge Sd/-R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, Judge lsn WP(Crl.).No. 408 of 2018 5 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE UNDATED LETTER OF DETENU EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 27.9.2018 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE DETENU WITH PETITIONER.

   RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS :     NIL



                                                      TRUE COPY



                                                   P.A TO JUDGE




   LSN