Riyas N.A vs The Superintendent Of Police
2021 Latest Caselaw 4008 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

                                   &

                 THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA

    WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 14TH MAGHA,1942

                         WP(Crl.).No.14 OF 2021


PETITIONER/S:

                RIYAS N.A
                AGED 32 YEARS
                S/O.ABDUL KHADER, NJATTUVETTIL HOUSE, CHIRAYAM,
                PANAYIKULAM P.O., ERNAKULAM-683 511.

                BY ADVS.
                SRI.C.ANILKUMAR (KALLESSERIL)
                SRI.K.S.FRIJO
                SRI.C.Y.VINOD KUMAR

RESPONDENT/S:

      1         THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
                ALUVA RURAL, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683 101.

      2         THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
                BINANI PURAM POLICE STATION, MUPPATHADOM, ERNAKULAM-
                683 110.

      3         SANOFAR,
                S/O.NAHAS, MEDAYIL VEEDU, PAREPARAMBU, KARUKAPPILLY,
                DESHABHIMANI ROAD, KALOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM-682 017.

      4         ANUJA AZEEZ,
                AGED 27 YEARS
                D/O.ABDUL ASEEZ, C/O.SANOFAR, S/O.NAHAS, MEDAYIL
                VEEDU, PAREPARAMBU, KARUKAPPILLY, DESHABHIMANI ROAD,
                KALOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM-682 017.

                R1-2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

OTHER PRESENT:

                SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.B.RAMANAND

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
03.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(Crl.).No.14 OF 2021

                                 2



                           JUDGMENT

Dated this the 3rd day of February 2021

K. Vinod Chandran, J.

The fourth respondent is present before us along with the

minor child Raees. The fourth respondent submits that she has

on her own will gone with the third respondent.

2. However, petitioner herein is the father of the minor

child and was concerned with the whereabouts and welfare of

the child. We have interacted with the minor child; four years in

age. We also asked the mother to step outside to see how the

child responds to the father. The minor child has repeatedly, told

us that 'he is afraid of Riyas' (the father) and 'Riyas beats him'.

We asked him whether his mother instructed him to say this and

he answered in the affirmative. When the mother came back the

child immediately went to the mother and told her that he has

spoken as instructed, which makes it very evident that the child

has been tutored. We hence directed the child to have

interaction with the father inside our Chambers for an hour. We

directed the mother to wait outside the Chambers. We also

directed one of the office staff to be inside the Chambers along WP(Crl.).No.14 OF 2021

with the father and child.

3. As far as the custody of the child is concerned, the

petitioner would have to agitate the cause before the Family

Court. However he was not aware of the whereabouts and the

exact address where the fourth respondent and the minor child

are now residing. We have asked the fourth respondent to

supply the address and she has given us the address of the third

respondent where she is now residing, viz: "C/o. Sanofar, Joe

Apartment, Near St. George L.P. School, Kaloor - 682 025". This

would enable the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy before

the jurisdictional Family Court.

4. After the father's interaction with the child, we have seen

that the child responds well to the father. In such circumstances,

there shall be a direction to the 4 th respondent to allow the

father to interact with the child on every alternate Sundays

between 4.00 p.m. and 5.00 p.m at the residential address

provided herein above. This shall be continued for two months,

within which time, the petitioner is advised to approach the

Family Court. The Family Court shall be entitled to decide on the

custody and further visitation rights after interacting with the

parties. The writ petition is disposed of with the above WP(Crl.).No.14 OF 2021

direction, further making it clear that either of the parties can

move this Court during the two months period for any

modification, on change in circumstance. There is no scope for

issuance of a writ of habeas corpus, which is declined. The writ

petition however is disposed of with the above directions. No

order as to costs.

Sd/-

K.VINOD CHANDRAN

JUDGE

Sd/-

                                          M.R.ANITHA

shg                                         JUDGE
 WP(Crl.).No.14 OF 2021





                             APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1               TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 26.12.20

SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 29.12.20 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.