High CourtsDivision Bench(2010) 09 KL CK 0312

Sasindran vs State of Kerala, Deputy Superintendent of Police and Sub Inspector of Police

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 9 September 2010

HON’BLE JUDGES
R. Basant, J · M.L. Joseph Francis, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 278 of 2010 (S)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 377 words

R. Basant, J.—This judgment must be read in continuation of the earlier orders passed by us in the matter resting with the order dt. 11.8.2010. On the day the case was posted to 13.9.2010, we directed the police to make all efforts to trace out the alleged detenu, at the earliest. Subsequent to the order dated 11.8.2010, the alleged detenu, Sidinkumar K, was traced by the police and was produced before the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate referred the child to the Government Observation Home, Kasargod, and today when the case is called, the alleged detenu - Sidinkumar, aged 13 years, is produced from the Government Observation Home, Kasargod. The petitioner is present. He is represented by his counsel. We interacted with the alleged detenu alone initially and later in the presence of the petitioner, his father. The learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader were also present.

2.

The alleged detenu - Sidinkumar, now prays before us that he wants to go along with his father, the petitioner herein. The petitioner, his father, is willing to take the alleged detenu with him. We have impressed upon the petitioner/the father of the child the need to deal with him in an informed manner. The child deserves to be approached with due recognition of his psychic trauma that the child must evidently be undergoing now. The petitioner agrees to do the needful. The learned Counsel for the petitioner agrees that his counsel, the petitioner will be properly advised to deal with the child in a proper manner.

3.

We accept the request of the petitioner as also the child and grant permission for the child to return along with the petitioner. As petitioner is the legal custodian of the child, it is necessary to deal ...into action disputes/ facts. The child/ alleged detenu informs us that he was on his own occasion to Mangalore initially and from there to Trivandrum.

4.

In the result;

(a) This Writ Petition is allowed.

(b) The alleged detenue, Sidinkumar, aged 13 years (DOB:26.12.1996) is permitted to leave the court along with the petitioner, his father.

4.

Hand over a copy of this judgment to the learned Government Pleader to communicate the same immediately to the Government Observation Home, Kasargod.