Sanjal K Saju vs State Police Chief
2021 Latest Caselaw 17291 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
                              &
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN
 TUESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 26TH SRAVANA, 1943
                  WP(CRL.) NO. 199 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
          SANJAL K SAJU
          AGED 27 YEARS
          S/O.LATE SAJU THOMAS, KURISINKAL HOUSE, PATTALAM,
          KOCHI 682 001
          BY ADVS.
          P.THOMAS GEEVERGHESE
          TONY THOMAS (INCHIPARAMBIL)
          E.S.FIROS
          AMRUTHA K.P.
RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE POLICE CHIEF
          STATE POLICE HEADQUARTERS, VALLAYAMBALAM,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 010
    2     SUPERINTEND OF POLICE (CITY)
          ERNAKULAM 682 011
    3     STATION HOUSE OFFICER
          ELAMAKKARA 682 026, ERNAKULAM.
    4     JOSEPH
          AGED 55 YEARS
          PANDIPPILLI HOUSE, MANAKKODAM ROAD, ELAMAKKARA
          P.O., ERNAKULAM 682 026.
          BY SRI.K.P.HARISH, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR
          R1 TO R3
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
17.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.( Crl.) No.199 of 2021                 2




                                    JUDGMENT

SHAJI P. CHALY,J This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

i) Issue a writ of habeas corpus or such other writ, order or direction, directing the Respondents 1 to 3 to track out the body and person of Ms. Akeena Joseph, who is unlawfully detained and held in illegal custody by Respondent No.4 against her free will.

ii) Issue a writ of habeas corpus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to produce the person of Ms. Akeena Joseph before this Honourable Court and release her from detention to act feely according to her wishes; and

ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents not to deprive Ms. Akeena Joseph from basic communication devices like mobile phone.

iv) issue such other writ, order or direction which this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, so as to secure the ends of justice.

2. The subject issue relates to alleged forceful detention of the

detenue viz., Ms.Akeena Joseph by the 4th respondent - her father. When

the matter was considered on the 9th day of August, 2021, a learned Division

Bench of this Court directed the learned Government Pleader to secure

instructions and further directed the Station House Officer/3 rd respondent to

get a statement of the alleged detenue. It was further directed that the

statement shall be obtained by a woman police officer, without the presence

of parents or any family members of the alleged detenue, and accordingly

this matter is posted before this Court today for instructions, report and

statement.

3. However, today when the matter was taken up, learned counsel for

petitioner Sri.P.Thomas Geevarghese, submitted before this Court that after

the Police recording the statement of the detenue, the detenue ran away

from the home of the 4th respondent and joined the petitioner and the Police

produced the detenue before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Aluva

and on ascertaining the wishes of the detenue, she expressed her intention

to go with the petitioner. Accordingly, the learned Magistrate has passed an

order permitting the detenue to go with the petitioner. Therefore, according

the learned counsel for petitioner, in fact the writ petition has virtually

become infructuous and he is inclined to withdraw the same, however,

inspite of the order passed by the Magistrate, there is Police harassment.

4. Learned Senior Government Pleader Sri.K.P.Harish Kumar on the

other hand submitted that Police has taken statement of the detenue and

detenue has expressed that she does not want to go with the petitioner.

5. We are not inclined to consider all those aspects in view of the

subsequent developments and the order passed by the competent

Magistrate. In that view of the matter, petitioner is permitted to withdraw

the writ petition and if there is any harassment, it is for the petitioner to

point out the same to the Magistrate since already an order is passed, in

accordance with law, by the Magistrate.

Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

Sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE Sd/-

                                                        A.BADHARUDEEN,
smv                                                           JUDGE





                         APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) 199/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1                   PHOTOGRAPH TOOK ON DURING THEIR
                             RELATIONSHIP
Exhibit P2                   THE TRUE COPY OF THE SCREENSHOT OF THE
                             FACEBOOK MESSENGER CHAT OF THE PETITIONER
                             AND DETENUE, REPRESENTING THEIR
                             RELATIONSHIP
Exhibit P3                   TRUE COPY OF THE WHATSAPP CHAT SHOWING
                             THE DETERMINATION OF THE DETENUE TO COME
                             OUT WITH THE PETITIONER, TO GET MARRIED.
Exhibit P4                   LAST WHATS APP CHATS BETWEEN THE
                             PETITIONER AND THE DETENUE, SHOWING THAT
                             DETENUE, IS IN DETENTION AND DEPRIVED OF
                             MOBILE PHONE.