E.C.Mohanan Vs. State of Kerala - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1136330
CourtKerala High Court
Decided OnMar-26-2014
JudgeHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
AppellantE.C.Mohanan
RespondentState of Kerala
Excerpt:
in the high court of keralaat ernakulam present: the honourable mr.justice antony dominic & the honourable mr. justice anil k.narendran wednesday, the26h day of march20145th chaithra, 1936 wp(crl.).no. 124 of 2014 (s) ----------------------------- petitioner: ------------------ e.c.mohanan, 'seagrace', maloorkunnu housing colony, a.r.camp road marikunnu p.o., kozhikode-673 012. by advs.sri.t.sethumadhavan (sr.) sri.pushparajan kodoth sri.k.jayesh mohankumar smt.n.deepa smt.vandana menon respondent(s): ---------------------------- 1. stateof kerala, represented by the chief secretary to government secretariat,thiruvananthapuram-695 001.2. sub inspector of police, chevayoor, kozhikode-673 012.3. sumesh, s/o.sudhakaran, kamalakunnu colony,kakkody kozhikode district. r1-r2 by director general of prosecution sri asaf ali r3 by adv. sri.k.a.salil narayanan this writ petition (criminal) having been finally heard on2603-2014, the court on the same day delivered the following: wp(crl.).no. 124 of 2014 (s) ----------------------------- appendix petitioner(s)' exhibits ------------------------------------- exhibit-p1 series: true copy of the prescription issued by dr.k.s.mohan dated218.2006 and during subsequent visits. exhibit-p2 series: true copy of the presecription issued by dr.p.krishnakumar dated27.2007 and1207.2007. exhibit-p3: true copy of the prescription issued by dr.sachin a.patkar dated3012.2013. exhibit-p4: true copy of the rheumatology test report contested from kennisha diognistic centre at mumbai based on the reference made by dr.sachin a.patkar. exhibit-p5: true copy of the proceedings in crime no.562/2013. exhibit-p6: true copy of the complaint filed by the petitioner before2d respondent dated1703.2014. respondent(s)' exhibits: nil true copy p.a.to judge dsn antony dominic & anil k.narendran, jj.-------------------------------------------------- w.p.(crl.)no.124 of 2014 -------------------------------------------------- dated this the26h day of march, 2014 judgment antony dominic,j.the writ petition is filed alleging that the petitioner's daughter rima mohanan is being illegally detained by the 3rd respondent. according to the petitioner, his daughter is a second year degree student and is undergoing psychiatric treatment for her behavioural disorder. it is stated that during august, 2013, she developed a relationship with the 3rd respondent and was found missing from his house on 8.9.2013. it is alleged that on a complaint made by the petitioner, she was traced out by the police and was produced before the judicial first class magistrate court, kozhikode on 11.9.2013, when she was restored to the custody of the petitioner. the petitioner states that again, from 17.3.2014, she was found missing and he learnt that she is being illegally detained by the 3rd respondent. with this allegation, he has filed this writ petition with the prayer to set his daughter at liberty.2. on the filing of the writ petition, this court passed w.p.(crl.)no.124/14 -2- order dated 21.3.2014 requiring the respondents to produce the detenue before us. accordingly, she was produced before us today along with the 3rd respondent. on her appearance, we interacted with her and also heard the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent. the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent submitted that the detenue and the 3rd respondent were in love and that after the detenue left her parental house on 8.9.2013, she and the 3rd respondent got married in terms of the customary rights at the sree krishna rukmini temple calicut on 10.9.2013. the certificate issued by the manager of the temple also was produced before us for perusal. it is stated that, however on that occasion, the detenue agreed to return to her parental house hoping that as agreed by her parents, she would be given in marriage to the 3rd respondent. it is stated that as this promise of the parents was not honoured, she again left with the 3rd respondent voluntarily. in answer to our questions, the detenue explained that she was under treatment for impulsive behaviour and she confirmed that she is the married wife of the 3rd respondent. she has also confirmed that she is living with the 3rd w.p.(crl.)no.124/14 -3- respondent as his wife voluntarily and that she has no complaint whatsoever against the 3rd respondent or anybody else.3. the interaction with the detenue does not in any manner indicate that the detenue is a person incapable of understanding the consequences of her actions. she has also stated before us that she has left the parental home voluntarily and that she is not in detention. evidently, therefore, the detenue is not in detention, entitling the petitioner to maintain a writ of habeas corpus before this court. in such circumstances, this court can only close the writ petition and the writ petition is accordingly closed. sd/- antony dominic, judge sd/- anil k.narendran, judge dsn
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALAAT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE26H DAY OF MARCH20145TH CHAITHRA, 1936 WP(Crl.).No. 124 of 2014 (S) ----------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ E.C.MOHANAN, 'SEAGRACE', MALOORKUNNU HOUSING COLONY, A.R.CAMP ROAD MARIKUNNU P.O., KOZHIKODE-673 012. BY ADVS.SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN (SR.) SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR SMT.N.DEEPA SMT.VANDANA MENON RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATEOF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHEVAYOOR, KOZHIKODE-673 012.

3. SUMESH, S/O.SUDHAKARAN, KAMALAKUNNU COLONY,KAKKODY KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. R1-R2 BY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION SRI ASAF ALI R3 BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON2603-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(Crl.).No. 124 of 2014 (S) ----------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT-P1 SERIES: TRUE COPY OF THE PRESCRIPTION ISSUED BY DR.K.S.MOHAN DATED218.2006 AND DURING SUBSEQUENT VISITS. EXHIBIT-P2 SERIES: TRUE COPY OF THE PRESECRIPTION ISSUED BY DR.P.KRISHNAKUMAR DATED27.2007 AND1207.2007. EXHIBIT-P3: TRUE COPY OF THE PRESCRIPTION ISSUED BY DR.SACHIN A.PATKAR DATED3012.2013. EXHIBIT-P4: TRUE COPY OF THE RHEUMATOLOGY TEST REPORT CONTESTED FROM KENNISHA DIOGNISTIC CENTRE AT MUMBAI BASED ON THE REFERENCE MADE BY DR.SACHIN A.PATKAR. EXHIBIT-P5: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS IN CRIME NO.562/2013. EXHIBIT-P6: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE2D RESPONDENT DATED1703.2014. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE dsn ANTONY DOMINIC & ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JJ.

-------------------------------------------------- W.P.(Crl.)No.124 of 2014 -------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE26h DAY OF MARCH, 2014 JUDGMENT

ANTONY DOMINIC,J.

The Writ Petition is filed alleging that the petitioner's daughter Rima Mohanan is being illegally detained by the 3rd respondent. According to the petitioner, his daughter is a second year Degree student and is undergoing psychiatric treatment for her behavioural disorder. It is stated that during August, 2013, she developed a relationship with the 3rd respondent and was found missing from his house on 8.9.2013. It is alleged that on a complaint made by the petitioner, she was traced out by the Police and was produced before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kozhikode on 11.9.2013, when she was restored to the custody of the petitioner. The petitioner states that again, from 17.3.2014, she was found missing and he learnt that she is being illegally detained by the 3rd respondent. With this allegation, he has filed this Writ Petition with the prayer to set his daughter at liberty.

2. On the filing of the Writ Petition, this Court passed W.P.(Crl.)No.124/14 -2- order dated 21.3.2014 requiring the respondents to produce the detenue before us. Accordingly, she was produced before us today along with the 3rd respondent. On her appearance, we interacted with her and also heard the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent. The learned counsel for the 3rd respondent submitted that the detenue and the 3rd respondent were in love and that after the detenue left her parental house on 8.9.2013, she and the 3rd respondent got married in terms of the customary rights at the Sree Krishna Rukmini Temple Calicut on 10.9.2013. The certificate issued by the Manager of the temple also was produced before us for perusal. It is stated that, however on that occasion, the detenue agreed to return to her parental house hoping that as agreed by her parents, she would be given in marriage to the 3rd respondent. It is stated that as this promise of the parents was not honoured, she again left with the 3rd respondent voluntarily. In answer to our questions, the detenue explained that she was under treatment for impulsive behaviour and she confirmed that she is the married wife of the 3rd respondent. She has also confirmed that she is living with the 3rd W.P.(Crl.)No.124/14 -3- respondent as his wife voluntarily and that she has no complaint whatsoever against the 3rd respondent or anybody else.

3. The interaction with the detenue does not in any manner indicate that the detenue is a person incapable of understanding the consequences of her actions. She has also stated before us that she has left the parental home voluntarily and that she is not in detention. Evidently, therefore, the detenue is not in detention, entitling the petitioner to maintain a writ of habeas corpus before this Court. In such circumstances, this Court can only close the Writ Petition and the Writ Petition is accordingly closed. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE dsn