Murali Kumar V. vs State of Karnataka and Sri Byrappa

Shylendra Kumar, J.—Petition seeking for issue of a writ of habeas corpus by a husband, in respect of his wife by name Smt Asha, is a sequel to the order dated 17-8-2011 passed by this court in WP(HC) No 139 of 2011, which is a writ petition that had been filed for a like purpose by the father of the lady, Smt Asha at that time and the present petitioner having been arrayed as third respondent in that petition!

This court has passed the following order on 17-8-2011:

The detenue on being produced by the Jurisdictional Police had submitted that she had married third respondent and she has conceived. We had sent the detenue to State Reception Centre and also sought for medical report. The Jurisdictional police have submitted the medical report

The medical report submitted by the Medical Officer of Vani Vilas Hospital. Bangalore, indicates that detenue is carrying five months pregnancy. In the circumstances, the mother of the detenue is the best person to take care of her.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion about the relationship of 3rd respondent and the detenue. we direct the jurisdictional police officer to hand-over the detenue to her mother.

The petitioner (father of detenue) and his wife shall take care of their daughter and shall not commit any acts prejudicial to the interest of the detenue. Petitioner shall also permit 3rd respondent to visit the detenue.

In view of these developments, the petition is dismissed.

It is now the turn of third respondent in that writ petition to become petitioner to seek for a like prayer alleging that his wife Smt Asha is in the compulsive custody of her parents, particularly her father Byrappa, being impleaded as fourth respondent to this petition.

When this matter had come up for orders regarding deficiency in presenting the petition on 2-12-2011, we had granted some tune fox compliance and in the meanwhile, as the learned SPP had been apprised of the matter through a copy of the writ petition having been furnished in advance and with the assistance of the concerned police, learned SPP has ensured the appearance of the person for whose production the writ petition is filed, namely Smt Asha and she is accompanied by her mother Neelamma. Petitioner is also present.

We have heard Sri K.R. Rajendra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri H S Chandramouli, learned SPP and Sri N.S. Sampangiramaiah, HCGP for R-1 to 3.

We have queried said Smt Asha at some length about her preference to stay in her mother''s house and whether she is inclined to go to the house of her husband, and also as to whether she is under any compulsion or extraordinary pressure to remain in the house of her mother for the present etc., and we had adjourned the matter to be taken up in camera to enable said Smt Asha to express her inclination in a free atmosphere.

We even appointed Ms Sinchana M R, Advocate, as amicus curiae to assist, us in not only to put at ease the victim or person Smt Asha but also to elicit her views by apprising and educating her on all circumstances and Ms Sinchana has also submitted that said Smt Asha appears to be not very free to express her inclination one way or the other: that she appears to be in some tension or pressure as of now and it may take some time for her to relax etc.

Even in the in camera proceedings, on our query, Smt Asha has expressed her inclination to go with her mother as of now and stay with her parents for some time etc.

While it may he a fact that the petitioner has married said Smt Asha, as is evidenced in terms of marriage certificate [copy at Annexure-A to the writ petition) and they had lived together in the house of petitioner for some time, the present position is that the said Smt Asha is inclined to stay with her mother as of now.

In this state of affairs, we are left with no choice but to dismiss this writ petition, but would nevertheless add a word of caution that Smt Neelamma - mother Smt Asha, who is present before the court, should take proper care of her daughter while in her custody and that she should ensure that her daughter is tree to move around and if she should so express her desire to go and reside with her husband, she is allowed and enabled to do so and not to pressurize her or to curtail her freedom or restrict her movement and after we have made this known to the mother of Smt Asha, she has assured the court that she will take care Smt Asha and will be responsible for her care and safety.

We had requested the assistance of Ms Sinchana M R, Advocate, No 71, 1st Floor, 8th Cross, Behind Ramanashree Hotel, Sampangiram Nagar, Bangalore, who had readily performed the task assigned to her and acted as amicus curiae to assist the court and we fix her fee for the service at Rs. 2,000/- [Rupees two thousand only) and direct the secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, Bangalore, to pay the said fee to Ms Sinchana forthwith.

This writ petition, in all other respects, is dismissed.