Manoj T.M. vs Circle Inspector of Police

R. Basant, J.—The petitioner has come to this Court with this petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce Ms.Suneera, a young woman, aged 21 years (date of birth : 30/05/1989), with whom he is in love and who, according to him, is detained illegally by respondents 2 and 3, the mother and brother respectively of Ms. Suneera (hereinafter referred to as the alleged detenue).

According to the petitioner, he knows driving. He engages himself as a painter now. He has attained the age of 23 years. He, who resides at Edathala, Aluva and the alleged detenue, who resides at Kaalikavu, Malappram happened to know each other through telephone calls. Later, they decided to get married. On 25/7/2010, the alleged detenue Ms. Suneera left her residence and joined the petitioner. There were complaints from some local people and the petitioner and the alleged detenue were called to the police station. Some local people intervened. They raised objections to the relationship between the petitioner and the alleged detenue. In these circumstances, the alleged detenue went back to reside along with respondents 2 and 3. According to the petitioner, at the instance and instigation of some muslim activists, the alleged detenue was sent back along with respondents 2 and 3. The petitioner had submitted a complaint to the police expressing apprehensions about threat and physical harm against him. According to the petitioner, the alleged detenue wants to join him and he wants to unite in matrimony with the alleged detenue. Respondents 2 and 3, at the instance of some local people, are illegally detaining the alleged detenue, complained the petitioner.

This petition was filed on 06/08/2010. The same was admitted on 11/08/2010. Notice was ordered to the respondents and the case was posted to this date.

Today when the case is called, the petitioner is present. He is represented by a counsel. Along with the petitioner, the wives of his two uncles Smt. Bindu and Smt. Lalitha have also come to Court. The second respondent has come in person to Court. Along with her, the alleged detenue has also come to Court. The 2nd respondent and the alleged detenue are not represented by any counsel. The 3rd respondent is not now residing along with the second respondent and the alleged detenue, submits the second respondent.

As the alleged detenue had come to Court along with the second respondent who was allegedly detaining and confining her in custody illegally, we permitted the alleged detenue to remain alone in the chamber for some period of time without opportunity for anyone to interact with her.

After the lunch recess, we interacted with the alleged detenue alone initially and later in the presence of the petitioner and the wives of his uncles. Later, we interacted with the alleged detenue in the presence of the 2nd respondent. The learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader were also present. The alleged detenue stated before us categorically that she is in love with the petitioner and wants to marry him. According to her, even her mother, the 2nd respondent has now accepted the relationship between her and the petitioner. She wants to return from Court along with the petitioner and get married to him.

The 2nd respondent submitted that the 2nd respondent wants to raise no objection against the relationship between the alleged detenue and the petitioner now. It is true that the petitioner and the alleged detenue belong to different communities. The 2nd respondent has no objection now against the relationship between the petitioner and the alleged detenue. It may be insisted that they do get married in accordance with law, before they commence co-habitation, she submits. Thereafter, the petitioner and the alleged detenue can be permitted to live as husband and wife in legal matrimony, submits the 2nd respondent. There is no appearance for the 3rd respondent. The learned Government Pleader appears for respondents 1 and 4.

In a petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus, we are primarily concerned with the question whether the alleged detenue is under any illegal detention or confinement. The statement of the alleged detenue makes it clear to us that she is compelled to reside along with the second respondent only because certain persons objected to her relationship with the petitioner. She does not want to continue to reside with the second respondent. She wants to go along with the petitioner. The second respondent is willing to permit the alleged detenue to go with the petitioner subject to the sole condition that they must get married in accordance with law. The wives of the uncles of the petitioner submit that the relatives of the petitioner have no objection and are willing to accept the relationship between the petitioner and the alleged detenue. The parties belong to the economically weaker sections and are not able to afford to accommodate the alleged detenue in a hostel till marriage. Her continued residence with the second respondent may be unwelcome in their locality. They and the petitioner agree that the alleged detenue shall be accommodated along with the above said Bindu at her house near the house of the petitioner till the petitioner and the alleged detenue enter valid matrimony. Until then, they shall not be permitted to co-habit, submits the said Bindu. The petitioner and the alleged detenue as also the 2nd respondent accept that course.

We are now satisfied, in the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, that the alleged detenue can be permitted to go with Smt.Bindu, the wife of the uncle of the petitioner as agreed by all concerned. The petitioner and the alleged detenue agree that they shall get married in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, if sufficient time is given. They, as well as the aunts of the petitioner, accept and agree that the alleged detenue and the petitioner shall start co-habitation only after they get married in accordance with law under the Special Marriage Act. Accordingly, we are satisfied that this petition can be allowed and appropriate directions can be issued.

In the result,

a) This writ petition is allowed.

b) The alleged detenue Ms.Suneera is permitted to leave the Court along with the petitioner and his aunts Smt. Bindu and Smt. Lalitha.

c) We accept the submission of the alleged detenue and the petitioner that if sufficient time is given, they shall get married in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act and produce the certificate of marriage before Court. We accept the submission of the petitioner and the alleged detenue as also Smt.Bindu, aunt of the petitioner that until their marriage is solemnised and registered in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, the alleged detenue shall be accommodated in her house and that the petitioner and the alleged detenue shall not be permitted to co- habit as husband and wife until their marriage is solemnised and registered under the Special Marriage Act. We accept the submission of the alleged detenue and the petitioner that certificate under the Special Marriage Act to confirm solemnisation and registration of the marriage shall be produced before us for our verification with a copy for the purpose of being furnished to the second respondent.

Call this petition again on 04/10/2010. On that day, the alleged detenue and the petitioner shall appear before us with the certificate issued under the Special Marriage Act to confirm that they have legally got married. A copy of such certificate shall also be produced for being furnished to the second respondent, the mother of the alleged detenue.