U X Johnson vs State Of Kerala

Alexander Thomas, J

The prayers in the instant Writ Petition (Criminal) seeking for Habeas Corpus are as follows:

“

i. To issue a Writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus or any other Writ, order or direction compelling and commanding the respondents 1 to 6 to produce the detenue before the Hon'ble Court.

ii. To issue a direction to the respondents 7 and 8 not to register the marriage of the detenue with 4th respondent, unless and until the Ext P1 is disposed judiciously.

iii. Petitioner also prays that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to dispense with the translation of the documents produced in the vernacular language.

iv. To grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

Heard Sri.C.Rajendran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.E.C.Bineesh, learned Prosecutor appearing for official respondents 1 to 3 & 6 to 8 and Sri.Rajit, learned Advocate appearing for contesting respondents 4 & 5.

The case set up in the above Writ Petition (Criminal) is to the effect that, the petitioner is the father of the alleged detenue (Ms.Sheethal Johny, aged 25 years) involved in this case and that, she was found missing since 8.11.2022 and that, enquiries have revealed that she is under the wrongful confinement and illegal detention of R-4, in the residence of R-5 (father of R-4), etc.

After admitting this case, we directed that R-2 & R-3 will ensure the production of the alleged detenue (daughter of the petitioner) before the Secretary, The District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Thrissur on 25.11.2022, so as to enable us to directly interact with the alleged detenue and to ascertain the correct details. When the case came up for consideration on 25.11.2022, the petitioner and his wife (parents of the alleged detenue) did not report before the DLSA, Thrissur, but had reported directly before this Court. Accordingly, the counsel for the petitioner requested an adjournment so that the petitioner could directly interact with the alleged detenue before this Court, etc. Hence, we adjourned the case to today (29.11.2022) and R-3 (SHO) was directed to ensure the production of the alleged detenue before this Court and the petitioner and his wife (parents of the alleged detenue) were also requested to be present before this Court today, etc.

Today, we have interacted with the alleged detenue as well as her parents. The alleged detenue has told us that, after completing degree course she has passed Post Graduate Diploma in Aviation course and that, she is now employed as Ground Staff in IndiGo Airlines attached to their centre in the Kannur International Airport. Further that, she was having an affair with R-4 for some time and that, they have decided to get married and that, though R-4 belongs to different community, they have decided not to go for any change of religion and that, they would solemnize and register the marriage in accordance with the provisions contained in the Special Marriage Act, for which statutory notice has also been given to the statutory Registrar concerned. Further that, she has voluntarily chosen to marry R-4 and that, she is not under the illegal detention of R-4 or R-5 or anyone else, etc.

We have also interacted with the parents and we gave opportunity to the parents to interact with the alleged detenue in the High Court premises. After such interaction, the petitioner, his wife and their daughter - the alleged detenue have reported before us that, the alleged detenue has again reiterated that she has decided to solemnize and register her marriage with R-4, in accordance with the Special Marriage Act, etc. The counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that in view of the abovesaid stand of the petitioner and his wife, this Court may close the case.

Accordingly, we recorded the submissions of the parties concerned. The submission made by the alleged detenue is in clear terms that she is not under the illegal detention of R-4 or R-5 or anyone else and that, she has voluntarily decided to marry R-4, etc. The alleged detenue is aged 25 years and she is an educated young lady who is now having employment, etc. Hence, no case for the issuance of Writ of

Habeas Corpus is made out in the instant case. No further orders and directions are called for.

With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Criminal) will stand disposed of.