AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 289 wordsC.S.Sudha, J.
In this writ petition, the petitioner, mother, alleges that her daughter, Deepa Rajan, aged 18 years, is being kept under the illegal detention of the 4th respondent. Hence the petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus to direct the 2nd respondent to produce the detenue before this Court.
Heard Smt.Sandhya Raju, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.K.A.Anas, the learned Government Pleader.
Read order dated 30/06/2023.
Today when the alleged detenue was produced before us, she remained firm on her decision that she wants to go with the 4th respondent. The counselling report of the Psychosocial Counsellor, Sakhi One Stop Centre is also before us. The counsellor also reports that the alleged detenue expressed her desire to go with the 4th respondent. This Court cannot in every case invoke parents' patriae jurisdiction, which can be invoked only in exceptional cases where the parties before it are either mentally incompetent or have not come of age and it is proved to the satisfaction of the court that the said parties have either no parent/legal guardian or has an abusive or negligent parent/legal guardian. That is not the position in the case on hand. The alleged detenue, a major, repeatedly expresses her desire to go with the 4th respondent and has also gone to the extent of saying that the criminal case registered against the 4th respondent is a false one and that it is a boundary dispute which has been converted into a criminal case. The alleged detenue is a major, capable of taking her own decision(s) and one who has no disability either mental or physical. From her submissions, no case of illegal detention is made out.
The writ petition is closed.