U. Shajahan vs The Sub Inspector of Police and Anish

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

his adult major daughter Jancy, aged 19 years (date of birth - 28.11.1991). She is a student of the final year degree course. She was residing with

her parents and a younger brother. While so, she was missing from 23.09.2010. The police did not succeed in tracing the alleged detenue Jancy

though a crime was registered. It is, in these circumstances, that the petitioner came to this Court with this petition on 04.10.2010.

This petition was admitted on 04.10.2010. Orders were passed subsequently on 08.10.2010 and 15.10.2010. This judgment must be read in

continuation of our earlier orders resting with the order dated 15.10.2010.

This Court had persuaded the alleged detenue Jancy to return from Court on 08.10.2010 and 15.10.2010 along with her parents. The parents

were granted time to counsel, advise and guide the alleged detenue.

Today when the case is called, the petitioner and his wife are present along with the alleged detenue. The petitioner is represented by a counsel.

Respondent No. 2, who is alleged to be detaining the alleged detenue, is also present along with his father Sasi. The 2nd respondent is represented

by a counsel.

The alleged detenue claimed for an opportunity to interact with the 2nd respondent. We permitted her to do so. Later we interacted with the

alleged detenue in the Chamber alone initially and later in the presence of her parents. Subsequently we interacted with her in the presence of the

2nd respondent and his father. Later we interacted with the alleged detenue in the presence of her parents and the 2nd respondent and his father.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Counsel for the 2nd respondent and the learned Government Pleader were present.

The alleged detenue stated before us categorically that she even now wants to go along with the 2nd respondent. They have been in love. They

have decided to get married. Notice under the Special Marriage Act has already been lodged before the Marriage Registrar on 28.09.2010. They

can now get their marriage solemnised and registered under the Special Marriage Act. Both the alleged detenue and the 2nd respondent pray that

they may be permitted to leave Court together. They seek permission to get their marriage solemnised and registered under the Special Marriage

Act. They agree to do so at the earliest. They further agree that the marriage certificate shall be produced before Court if further time is given to

produce the marriage certificate.

The father of the 2nd respondent submits that he is willing to accept the marriage between his son, the 2nd respondent and the alleged detenue.

He undertakes that the alleged detenue shall be properly looked after and taken care of by the 2nd respondent and his parents. They further agree

that the alleged detenue can continue in her own religion in accordance with her wishes. It is further agreed by the 2nd respondent that the alleged

detenue shall be permitted to continue and complete her education. The 2nd respondent, in response to a specific query, submits that he knows

and does not desire that the parents of the alleged detenue must give any property or ornaments to her. The 2nd respondent and the alleged

detenue have no such ambition or expectation, it is submitted.

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

confinement or detention. In this case, the alleged detenue is a young woman, who has crossed the age of 19 years, her date of birth being

28.11.1991. She is an educated woman, she being a student of the final year degree course. Her parents are unable to accept the relationship

between her and the 2nd respondent. But she is emphatic that she wants to get married to the 2nd respondent and leave with him from Court. We

are satisfied ourselves that the alleged detenue is speaking voluntarily and on her own free will. We have ensured that the alleged detenue remained

with her parents from 08.10.2010 to this date. We respect her decisional autonomy. We are satisfied that the alleged detenue can be permitted to

leave Court along with the 2nd respondent. We are convinced that she is not under illegal detention or confinement of the 2nd respondent and that

no directions under Article 226 of the Constitution need or deserve to be issued now.

Finally it is submitted that the 2nd respondent and the alleged detenue apprehend that vindictive and violent action may be directed against them

from the petitioner and his relatives. The petitioner undertakes that there shall be no such vindictive action. The learned Government Pleader

undertakes that requisite assistance shall be rendered by the 1st respondent. If any of the parties have any such complaints, they can approach the

police and the police shall take necessary action to prevent any such untoward acts, submits the learned Government Pleader.

The petitioner insists that some ornaments, now worn by the alleged detenue which were purchased by him with his funds, must be returned to

him. The 2nd respondent and the alleged detenue agree to the same and have promptly returned the same to the petitioner. The alleged detenue

and the 2nd respondent submit that the S.S.L.C. certificate of the alleged detenue is available with the petitioner. The same is required for her to

continue her studies and for future needs. The petitioner undertakes that the S.S.L.C. certificate of the alleged detenue shall be handed over to the

Sub Inspector of Police, Kadinamkulam Police Station, i.e. the 1st respondent, who shall return the same to the alleged detenue on proper

acknowledgment. The learned Government Pleader shall direct the 1st respondent to do the needful on this aspect.

In the result:

a) This Writ Petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed;

b) The alleged detenue Jancy is permitted to leave the Court along with the 2nd respondent, as desired by her;

c) We accept the undertaking of the alleged detenue and the 2nd respondent that they shall get their marriage solemnised and registered under the

provisions of the Special Marriage Act at the earliest - at any rate, within a period of 3 days. They further undertake that the certificate of marriage

shall be produced before this Court on the next date of posting along with a copy thereof for being furnished to the petitioner. The 2nd respondent,

his father and the alleged detenue agree and undertake that till the marriage is solemnised, the 2nd respondent and the alleged detenue shall not and

shall not be permitted to cohabit as husband and wife.

Call this petition again on 18.11.2010 for production of the marriage certificate.

Hand over a copy of this judgment to the learned Government Pleader forthwith.