AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R. Basant, J.—This petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus is filed by the petitioner to search for, trace and produce Ms. Princy, a woman aged above 21 years (date of birth 04.02.1988). This judgment must be read in continuation of the order dated 15.12.09 passed by us.
Today when the case is called, Ms. Princy has been brought from Santhi Niketan hostel. Her father, the 4th respondent, is present along with his counsel. The petitioner is present along with his counsel. Along with him, his father Salikumar and his mother Sajini have also come to Court.
The alleged detenue submits and the 4th respondent accepts that he had not gone to Santhi Niketan hostel after 15.12.2009 to meet his daughter or to interact with her. However, it is accepted that he had contacted his daughter, the alleged detenue over telephone on a couple of occasions. The alleged detenue asserts that she wants to marry the petitioner. She prays that she may be permitted to go along with the petitioner herein. She does not of course make any complaint against her father and evidently she wants to avoid any action against her father, the 4th respondent. The petitioner as also his parents agree to take the alleged detenue along with them. It is assured that marriage in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act shall be performed as expeditiously as possible. Notice dated 03.12.2009 has already been given and the marriage can be performed/solemnised under the Special Marriage Act on any future date. The petitioner and his parents as also the alleged detenue pray that the alleged detenue may be permitted to leave along with the petitioner and his parents and time may be granted to them to produce the marriage certificate.
The 4th respondent, the father of the alleged detenue, is even now unable to accept the proposed matrimony between the petitioner and his daughter, the alleged detenue. He prays for further opportunity for him to advise and counsel his daughter. But we note that from 15.12.2009, he has been granted that opportunity and he has not once met his daughter, the alleged detenue so far. We do not, in these circumstances, find any merit in the prayer for further opportunity the 4th respondent, his wife and father in law having not availed of the opportunity that was granted to them to that effect as per order dated 15.12.2009.
We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that this Writ Petition can now be allowed and appropriate directions can be issued. We accept the request of the 4th respondent that the petitioner and the alleged detenue may be permitted to produce the marriage certificate to confirm that they are legally married in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act. We accept the undertaking of the petitioner, his parents and the alleged detenue that the certificate of marriage shall be produced before this Court on the next date of posting.
In the result:
a) This Writ Petition is allowed;
b) The alleged detenue Ms. Princy is permitted to leave the Court as desired by her along with the petitioner and his parents;
c) We accept the undertaking of the petitioner, his parents and the alleged detenue that a certificate of marriage to confirm that the marriage between the petitioner and the alleged detenue has taken place in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act shall be produced before this Court on the next date of posting.
Accordingly we direct that the case be called on 18.01.2010, on which day the petitioner and the alleged detenue shall appear before this Court and produce before the Court a certificate to confirm that their marriage has taken place in accordance with provisions of the Special Marriage Act. A photocopy of such certificate shall also be produced for being handed over to the 4th respondent herein.
The petitioner, a young man aged 22 years, has come to this Court with this petition for issue of a writ of habeas corpus to search for, trace and produce Ms. Princy, a young woman, aged above 21 years (date of birth 04.02.1988), who, according to him, is under the illegal detention and custody of the 4th respondent, her father. According to the petitioner she and the said Princy are in love. They know each other for a fairly long period of time. They have decided to get married. She had conveyed information about such affair to her parents. But they were not willing to accept the said relationship. In these circumstances, the petitioner and the alleged detenue had got married on 04.11.2008 at Sree Muruga Temple, Palani according to Hindu rites. But they did not convey that information to others. After completing her course in B.SC. Nutritian and Diatetics, she took up employment in a hospital at Palakkad - Ahalya Hospital. Her parents hurriedly tried to give away her in marriage to some others. But she resisted such attempts. She came back to her house. She was allegedly being detained there and was being pressurised to enter into matrimony with some others. In these circumstances, she came out of her house and on 03.12.2009 they reported before the Sub Registrar/Marriage Officer, Udumbanchola and gave notice for solemnisation of their marriage under the Special Marriage Act. The said notice was given and the requisite fee was paid on 03.12.2009 as per Ext.P2 receipt. But her parents on coming to know that the alleged detenue had gone with the petitioner, prevailed upon the police and ensured that she was taken away to the house of the 4th respondent. Though it was agreed that the marriage shall be performed with the consent of all concerned, that undertaking was not observed. The alleged detenue, according to the petitioner, was being illegally detained at the house of the 4th respondent.
This petition was filed on 08.12.2009. The same was admitted on 09.12.2009. Notice was ordered to the respondents.
Today when the matter came up for hearing, the petitioner is present along with his counsel. Some of the petitioner''s relatives are also present. The 4th respondent and his wife Mini are present. The alleged detenue Ms. Princy has come to Court along with the 4th respondent and his wife, her parents.
As the alleged detenue comes from the custody of the 4th respondent who is alleged to keep her in illegal confinement we wanted to give the alleged detenue time to be left alone and to think, contemplate and modulate her response to our questions. Accordingly she was permitted to remain in the Chamber without opportunity for anyone to interact with her. She stated that she does not want to interact with the petitioner and therefore the petitioner was also not permitted to interact with her.
After the lunch recess, we interacted with the alleged detenue alone initially and later in the presence of her parents. Subsequently we interacted with the alleged detenue in the presence of the petitioner. The learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Counsel for the 4th respondent and the learned Government Pleader were also present.
We are satisfied that the alleged detenue, though she does not make any complaint against her parents of illegal detention and confinement, wants to get married to the petitioner. She does not want to return along with the 4th respondent. The 4th respondent and his wife pray for an opportunity for them for a few days to speak to, counsel and guide the alleged detenue. The alleged detenue is unwilling to go with the 4th respondent to his house or to the house of any other relatives of his.
A counter affidavit has been filed by the 4th respondent. We note that a legally valid marriage between the petitioner and the alleged detenue has not taken place so far and the same can take place only on or after 04.01.2010.
In these circumstances, after discussions with the parties alternatives were searched for. We are happy to note that at the end of the discussions, the parties have come to agree on certain course. Accordingly we issue the following directions:
i) The alleged detenue Ms. Princy shall be accommodated at Santhi Niketan hostel, Pachalam at Ernakulam till 04.01.2010. The 4th respondent agrees to pay for such accommodation of the alleged detenue;
ii) At the said hostel, the 4th respondent, his wife and his father in law shall be permitted to interact with the alleged detenue in accordance with the rules of the hostel till 03.01.2010. During this period they shall be permitted to meet the alleged detenue and counsel, advise and guide her in accordance with the rules of the hostel;
iii) The alleged detenue shall be brought to Court on 04.01.2010. Till then the alleged detenue shall have time to consider all options and make statement before the Court of her choices;
iv) Till 04.01.2010, the petitioner shall not interact with the alleged detenue directly or over the telephone.
Appropriate further orders shall be passed on 04.01.2010 after ascertaining the response of the alleged detenue - ie. after the 4th respondent, his wife and father in law are permitted to avail of the opportunity to counsel and guide her.
The learned Government Pleader assures that the needful shall be done to ensure that the alleged detenue is escorted to the hostel today and brought back from the hostel on 04.01.2010 by women police constables not in uniform.
Hand over copy to the learned Government Pleader for communication to the hostel authorities.