Lissy Abraham vs The District Superintendent Of ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1995 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                             PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

                                &

              THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA

    TUESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 29TH POUSHA, 1942

                     WP(Crl.).No.118 OF 2020

PETITIONER:

               LISSY ABRAHAM, AGED 43 YEARS, W/O.ABRAHAM,
               ULOTHU HOUSE, 6TH MAIL, MANKULAM P.O.,
               IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 561.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.N.C.RAJESH
               SMT.S.REKHA KUMARI
               SMT.HARITHA JAYAN

RESPONDENTS:

        1      THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
               DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, IDUKKI-685 602.

        2      THE STATION HOUSE OFFICE,
               MANKULAM POLICE STATION, IDUKKI-685 602.

        3      JOY MATHEW, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.MATHEW,
               THALACHIRA (H), DESOM, ALUVA-683 101.

*ADDL.4        THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KARKALA POLICE
               STATION, UDUPI DISTRICT, KARNATAKA STATE.

               ADDL.R4 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER
*              DATED 22-06-2020

               SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.B.RAMANAND
               R3 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE SEBASTIAN

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 19.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(Crl.).No.118 OF 2020                2




                                JUDGMENT

K. Vinod Chandran, J.

The petitioner is concerned with her

husband, who is said to be missing from Uduppi in

the State of Karnataka. The petitioner alleges in

the writ petition that her husband is in the

illegal custody of his employer, the 3rd

respondent, and one Shinto Thomas, who has not

been impleaded in the writ petition.

2. The 3rd respondent has filed a detailed

Counter Affidavit refuting the contention of the

petitioner that it was on his compulsion that her

husband went to Uduppi. He admits that the husband

of the petitioner was employed with him in his

Estate, but he was found missing on the night of

17.05.2020. One Santhosh, who is the friend of the

son of the petitioner, was informed of the same

and he had filed a complaint before the Karkkala

Rural Police Station, registered as Crime No.46 of

2020. The 3rd respondent is permanently residing at

Aluva and he asserts that he has absolutely no

knowledge of the whereabouts of the petitioner's

husband. He also denies the contention of the

petitioner that he has kept him in illegal

custody.

3. We see from the records that the Sub

Inspector of Police, Karkkala Rural Police Station

has filed detailed reports regarding the

investigation of the case. We see that the

Karnataka Police is carrying out an investigation

and the husband of the petitioner has not yet been

traced. However, the reports of the Sub Inspector

of Police Karkkala Rural Police Station does not

reveal any illegal detention of the petitioner's

husband. There is also no allegation against the

3rd respondent or his employees in the Estate at

Uduppi.

We are convinced that the case is one of

man-missing and there is no evidence as to the

petitioner's husband having been illegally

detained. In such circumstances, no writ of habeas

corpus can be issued. We close the writ petition.

Sd/-

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, Judge.

Sd/-

M.R. ANITHA, Judge.

sp/19/01/2021 //True Copy// P.A. To Judge

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 19.5.2020

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 22.5.2020