Kerala High Court
Rosamma vs The District Police Chief on 26 February, 2021
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.54 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
ROSAMMA
AGED 51 YEARS
D/O. CHINNAMMA, JAYANTHI COLONY, MUNDAKKAL, PERUMPUHA
P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 504.
BY ADVS.
SRI.PRATHEESH.P
SMT.ANJANA KANNATH
SMT.S.SEETHA
SMT.S.REKHA KUMARI
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
KOLLAM (RURAL), KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-
691 001.
2 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
KUNDARA POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN-691 501.
3 JAMES
JOY VILLA, MANIMALA P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686
543.
4 SOMINI
D/O. JAMES, JOY VILLA, MANIMALA P.O., KOTTAYAM
DISTRICT, PIN-686 543.
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.54 OF 2021
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 26th day of February 2021
K. Vinod Chandran. J
The petitioner is the aunt of the alleged
detenue, who was living with the petitioner since
her mother was abroad and the father was estranged
from the mother. It was submitted in the original
petition itself that the alleged detenue had moved
to her father's house and later she had been
missing from there. It was alleged that the
respondents 3 and 4 were keeping her in their
illegal custody. We directed the Police to get a
statement from the alleged detenue.
2.Today, a report has been filed along with the
statement of the alleged detenue. It is very
specifically stated that she is living with the
WP(Crl.).No.54 OF 2021
respondents 3 and 4 on her own freewill and she is
in a relationship with son of the respondents 3 and
4. As per her narration, it is admitted that she
was living with her mother's relatives as her
parents were estranged. Later, she developed a
relationship with the son of respondents 3 and 4,
in which circumstances the mother's family was not
happy with her. The alleged detenue then shifted to
her father's residence, where her father was
staying along with his mother. However, the father
is said to be an alcoholic and in such
circumstances, she was not happy to continue with
her father. In that circumstance, she left her
father's house and moved in with respondents 3 and
4, who are the parents of the person whom she is in
love with. The son of the respondents 3 and 4 is
abroad and he is likely to come back after three
months. They are also proposing to get married is
the categorical statement. She also says that she
WP(Crl.).No.54 OF 2021
is not in the illegal custody of the respondents 3
and 4 and is residing there on her own freewill as
also being looked after and educated by the
respondents 3 and 4. In the above circumstances, we
do not find any reason to entertain the writ
petition.
The writ petition would stand dismissed. No
order on costs.
Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN
JUDGE
Sd/-
M.R.ANITHA
JUDGE
SJ
WP(Crl.).No.54 OF 2021
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(CRL.)
NO.44/2021 DATED 8.2.2021.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED
9.2.2021.
