Sulaikha K V vs Nishad B P

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 11761 Ker
Judgement Date : 30 April, 2024

Kerala High Court

Sulaikha K V vs Nishad B P on 30 April, 2024

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
                                     &
                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
         TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 10TH VAISAKHA, 1946
                         WP(CRL.) NO. 433 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

              SULAIKHA K V
              AGED 52 YEARS
              W/O UMARALI, KOLLANTAKAYIL HOUSE, PURANG, PURANG POST,
              MARANCHERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT., PIN - 679584
              BY ADVS.
              BINU V V VEETTIL VALAPPIL
              MANEKSHA D.


RESPONDENTS:

     1        NISHAD B P
              AGED 24 YEARS
              S/O NASER, VATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, AMMAYIPALAM, MALANKARA
              VAYAL, NENMENI POST, NENMENI AMSOM, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN
              - 673592
     2        NASER
              AGE AND S/O NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, VATTAPARAMBIL
              HOUSE, AMMAYIPALAM, MALANKARA VAYAL, NENMENI POST,
              NENMENI AMSOM, WAYANAD DISTRICT., PIN - 673592
     3        JOEL DANIAL EAPEN
              AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, S/O DANIAL EAPEN,
              POOMALA POST, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT., PIN -
              673593
     4        THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
              AMBALAVAYAL, AMBALAVAYAL POLICE STATION, AMBALAVAYAL
              POST, WAYANAD DISTRICT., THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
              HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 673593
     5        THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
              SULTHAN BATHERI POLICE STATION, SULTHAN BATHERY POST,
              WAYANAD DISTRICT., THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH
              COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 673592
     6        THE WARDEN
              VIMAL JYOTHI WORKING WOMENS HOSTEL JAIN TEMPLE ROAD,
 WP(CRL.) NO. 433 OF 2024
                                  2

           SULTHAN BATHERI, WAYANAD., PIN - 673592
     7     THE MARRIAGE OFFICER & SUB REGISTRAR
           SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD DISTRICT.,
           PIN - 673592
           BY ADVS.
           VISHNU DAS
           ANAGHA A.S.(K/001213/2022)
           SRUTHI DAS(K/000199/2019)
           GINI GEORGE(K/001574/2024)
           MARIA NEETHU T.J(K/000581/2021)



           SR.PP. S.GOPINATH


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(CRL.) NO. 433 OF 2024
                                   3

                               JUDGMENT

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN.J The petitioner - mother of the alleged detenue, alleges that she is being detained against her wish by the 1st respondent.

2. When this matter was considered by this Court on 19.04.2024, the following order was issued:

" The alleged detenue - Kum.Husna Ummarali and the 1st respondent are present. Kum.Husna Ummarali submitted that she is voluntarily residing with the 1st respondent and that they have submitted an application before the 7th respondent - Marriage Officer & Sub Registrar showing their intention to get married as per the Special Marriage Act. Ext.P1 is the notice of intended marriage. It is further submitted that the marriage is proposed to be solemnized on 27.04.2024.
Post this case for further consideration on 30.04.2024. The parties shall appear on the next WP(CRL.) NO. 433 OF 2024 4 posting date."

3. Today, the alleged detenue - Smt.Husna Ummarali is present before us, along with the 1st respondent. She asserts, rather unequivocally, that she is not detained by the 1st respondent; but that, on the contrary, she has married him voluntarily and even give as a copy of the Marriage Certificate, in substantiation.

4. The petitioner projects a cause that she believes that the 1st respondent is involved in criminal activities and that he is unemployed, thus being not in a position to take care of her daughter.

5. The mind of a mother certainly would be procellous in such circumstances; but we are afraid that this would not be a ground for us to intervene and to set limits on the liberties of WP(CRL.) NO. 433 OF 2024 5 the alleged detenue, when she says that she is not in detention and that she wants to live with the 1st respondent, who she asserts to be her legally married husband.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner - Sri.Binu.V.V.Veettil, however, submitted that his client was already filed objections against the marriage stated to have been registered by the jurisdictional Registering Officer. Obviously, this is not an arena this Court can enter; and we, therefore, leave full liberty to the petitioner to invoke any remedy that may be available to her in law, for which purpose, all contentions in that regard are left open.

7. As far as this writ petition is concerned, we cannot move forward because of the stand taken by the alleged detenue. WP(CRL.) NO. 433 OF 2024 6 In the afore circumstances, with the above requested liberty being reserved to the petitioner, this writ petition is closed.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE Sd/-

EASWARAN S. JUDGE SAS WP(CRL.) NO. 433 OF 2024 7 APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) 433/2024 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE MARRIGE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT DATED 26.03.2024