Minerva vs District Police Chief
2021 Latest Caselaw 2649 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 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 2ND MAGHA, 1942

                       WP(Crl.).No.335 OF 2017(S)


PETITIONER:

               MINERVA, AGED 50 YEARS, W/O ABDUL KAREEM,
               KARIPPAMKULAM HOUSE, THALIKKULAM.PO., KAITHAKKAL
               (VIA), THRISUSR DISTRICT.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.B.S.SURESH (CHIRAKKARA)
               SMT.LAKSHMI SURESH

RESPONDENTS:

      1        DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
               THRISSUR DISTRICT PIN-690001

      2        SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE
               KATTOOR POLICE PIN-690004

      3        SHAMSUDEEN
               AGED 58 YEARS, CHERICKAL HOUSE,PIN-690004

      4        SALMA
               W/O. SHAMSUDEEN,CHERICKAL HOUSE,PANICKKARU MOOLA,
               KATTOOR PO., THRISSUR PIN-690004

      5        SABEENA
               W/O. SHEBIN.K.A CHERICKAL HOUSE, PIN-690004
               PANICKKARU MOOLA,KATTOOR PO., THRISSUR PIN-690004


OTHER PRESENT:

               GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SYAMJIRAM

      THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
  22.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(Crl.).No.335 of 2017            - 2 -




          K. Vinod Chandran & M.R. Anitha, JJ.
          -------------------------------------
               W.P.(Crl).No. 335 of 2017
           ------------------------------------
        Dated, this the 22nd day of January, 2021

                           JUDGMENT

Vinod Chandran, J.

The petitioner is the grandmother of two

twins born to her son and the 5th respondent. The

5th respondent is said to have been residing along

with the petitioner in the company of the two

children. The 5th respondent later left the marital

home and went to her parental residence. Obviously,

the children also were taken by the 5 th respondent

to her parental residence. The husband, the son of

the petitioner is said to have filed a petition

under the Guardian and Wards Act before the Family

Court. In such circumstance we do not think that

there is any warrant for production of children

before this Court in a habeas corpus petition. We

also notice that despite fresh notice having been

ordered on 12.10.2017 no process has been paid. We

hence find no reason to keep the writ petition

pending. We close the writ petition. but however,

leaving open all contentions to be urged before the

Family Court. No order as to costs.

Sd/-

K.VINOD CHANDRAN JUDGE

Sd/-

M.R.ANITHA JUDGE jma/-

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1: THE COPY OF THE BIRHT CERTIFICATE OF THE MINOR MUHAMMED SAYAN DATED 15.9.2015

EXHIBIT P2: THE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF THE MINOR SHIZA FATHIMA.KS DATED 15.9.2015

EXHIBIT P3: THE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH HER DAUGHTER -IN- LAW AND HER MINOR GRAND CHILDREN

EXHIBIT P4: THE COPY OF THE ENTRYIN THE POLICE REGISTER DATED 6.3.2016

EXHIBIT P5: THE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT GIVEN BY THE PETITIONER TO THE LOCAL POLICE DATED 26.3.2016

EXHIBIT P6: THE COPY OF THE APPLICATION GIVEN BY TH EPETITIONER'S SON TO THE JUMA-MUSJITH DATED 16.2017

EXHIBIT P7: THE COPY OF THE INTERIM STAY ORDER ISSUED BY THE FAMILY COURT DATED 9.3.2017

EXHIBIT P8: THE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT IN THE HON.FAMILY COURT DATED 3.7.2017

EXHIBIT P9: THE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT IN THE HO.FAMILY COURT DATED 12.7.2017