AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.—This Habeas Corpus Petition has been filed by the petitioner for production of the body of Smt. Shobika
Santhini wife of the petitioner, aged about 19 years from the alleged illegal custody of the respondents 3 and 4.
According to the petitioner, the detenue is his ladylove and they decided to get married and that their marriage was registered on 18.11.2008
before the Sub Registrar, Parasalai vide document No. 1074 of 2008 and that his wife, the detenue, Smt. Shobika Santhini was abducted by her
parents namely the respondents 3 and 4.
When this Habeas Corpus Petition was taken up today for hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor produced the detenue before this
Court.
We enquired the detenue who confirmed that she is Smt. Shobika Santhini; that she knows the petitioner and that she is 19 years old. She also
confirmed that she is doing her B.Sc., degree course and that she is staying with her parents. She further stated that the so called marriage claimed
by the petitioner was not true and that under coercion and undue influence such an incident of marriage had taken place. She also placed before us
a document, under the caption ""(sic)"" with her photograph affixed on the first page, dated 31.12.2008. The said document reads that the alleged
registration of marriage dated 18.11.2008 in the office of the Sub Registrar, Parasalai under document No. 1074 of 2008 was not out of her free
will and pleasure, but she was lured for execution of the said document. It further reads that she never agreed for registration of the said document
or marriage, that till date they have been living with their respective parents and therefore, the so called registration of marriage document should
stand cancelled whatever be the acceptability of the said document. In order to ensure that the signature found in the original as well as in the copy
filed before this Court is that of the detenue, we directed the detenue to affix her signature in the second page of xerox copy of the document dated
31.12.2008 in our presence and we find that the signature found in the document as well as the signature signed before us fully tally in all respects.
The said xerox copy of the document shall form part and parcel of this order. She also stated that she wants to live under the care and custody of
her parents namely the respondents 3 and 4 and she has no inclination or liking for the petitioner.
Having regard to the categoric statement made by the detenue, there is no scope for this Court to grant any relief in this Habeas Corpus Petition.
This Habeas Corpus Petition stands dismissed.