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
5 paragraphs · 210 wordsK. Vinod Chandran, J
The petitioner claims that the petitioner was in love with the daughter of the third respondent and that she is now kept in illegal custody of the third respondent.
On admission of the case, the police had contacted the third respondent and his daughter and a statement is filed by the Station House Officer along with a statement recorded from the alleged detenue.
The alleged detenue is working in an institution as a Telecaller and she admits that while she was doing her final year degree she met the petitioner and had exchanged messages with him. Though the petitioner is said to have fallen in love with her; she did not reciprocate and only had a friendly relationship with the petitioner. The alleged detenue is also not interested in the marriage with the petitioner and a specific statement to that effect has been made. It is also stated that when the petitioner continued his overtures, there was a complaint filed by the parents of the alleged detenue before the Station House Officer alleging harassment. She categorically stated that she is not in the illegal custody of her parents and she is with them on her own free will.
The writ petition stands closed.