Anusree Venugopal vs Commissioner Of Police
2021 Latest Caselaw 6833 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

                                   &

                 THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA

    FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1942

                         WP(Crl.).No.55 OF 2021


PETITIONER/S:

                ANUSREE VENUGOPAL
                AGED 35 YEARS
                W/O. JAYAKUMAR SUKUMARA PILLAI, MADUKKANIL HOUSE,
                THIRUVANCHOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 019.

                BY ADVS.
                SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA
                SRI.M.G.SREEJITH
                SMT.K.S.ARCHANA

RESPONDENT/S:

      1         COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
                REVENUE TOWER, KOCHI-682 011.

      2         STATION HOUSE OFFICER
                KADAVANTHRA POLICE STATION, KADAVANTHRA P.O.,
                ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 020.

                R1-2 BY DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION
                R1-2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

OTHER PRESENT:

                SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.S.U.NAZAR

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(Crl.).No.55 OF 2021

                                     2




                                JUDGMENT

Dated this the 26th day of February 2021

K. Vinod Chandran. J

The petitioner alleged that the husband of the

petitioner is kept in the illegal custody of one lady.

Though, the address of the lady, at Lakshadeep was

stated in the writ petition, she was not impleaded as

the address of the said lady at Ernakulam was not

available. Now, the learned counsel seeks impleadment

on the basis of the statement filed by the Police.

2. We directed the Police to trace out the husband

of the petitioner and get a statement from him. The

statement has been produced along with the report. The

report clearly indicates that the person is staying in

Ernakulam and that he has already filed a divorce

petition to dissolve the marriage with the petitioner.

It is also stated that he knows the lady, whose name is

indicated in the writ petition itself. But they are not

living together and he is not under any illegal WP(Crl.).No.55 OF 2021

detention, is the categorical statement.

3. In such circumstances, we do not find any

reason to issue a writ of habeas corpus. The petitioner

would be entitled to take appropriate remedies before

the appropriate forum. The writ petition does not

survive and it stands dismissed.

Sd/-

K.VINOD CHANDRAN JUDGE

Sd/-

M.R.ANITHA

JUDGE

SJ WP(Crl.).No.55 OF 2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE DATED 25.1.2021 ISSUED BY THE MANARCAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF SMT. SAFIYABI RECORDED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 3.1.2021.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26.1.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS.