Kerala High Court
Gilbert P.T vs State Of Kerala on 7 July, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
WEDNESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1943
W.P(CRL.) NO.142 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
GILBERT P.T., AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. THOMAS,
PALATTIL HOUSE, THENHIPALAM P.O.,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673636.
BY ADVS.
SRI.SAJITH KUMAR V.
SRI.VIVEK A.V.
SRI.GODWIN JOSEPH
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE STATE POLICE CHIEF,
POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695010.
3 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
O/O. DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, UP HILL,
MALAPPURAM P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676505.
4 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
THENHIPALAM POLICE STATION, CALICUT UNIVERSITY RD.,
KORACHANKANDY, THENHIPALAM P.O.,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673636.
5 CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, CBI, HEAD QUARTERS,
6TH FLOOR, LODHI ROAD, PLOT NO.5-B,
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM MARG,
CGO COMPLEX, NEW DELHI-110003.
6 NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, NIA HEAD QUARTERS,
NIA BUILDING, OPP. DYAL SINGH COLLEGE RD.,
CGO COMPLEX, PRAGATI VIHAR, NEW DELHI-110003.
W.P(Crl) No.142 of 2021 - 2 -
7 THERBIYATHUL ISLAM SABHA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER/PROPRIETOR, MUKHADAR,
CALICUT HO, CALICUT P.O., KOZHIKODE-673001.
8 YUNUS KOZHITHODI, S/O. KUNJUTTY HAJI,
RESIDING AT PANACHIYIL HOUSE, NEEROLPALAM,
THENHIPALAM P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673636.
9 NASEEMA YUNUS, W/O. YUNUS KOZHITHOD,
RESIDING AT PANACHIYIL HOUSE, NEEROLPALAM,
THENHIPALAM P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673636.
10 BUSHARA, W/O. BASHEER PONNACHAN,
CHARAVALAPPIL HOUSE, NEEROLPALAM, THENHIPALAM P.O.,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673636.
R1 TO R4 BY SRI.T.A.SHAJI, DIRECTOR GENERAL OF
PROSECUTIONS;
BY ADV SRI.P.NARAYANAN, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR;
R5 & R6 SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASST.SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA;
R7-SRI.MOHAMMED SAVAD.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 07.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P(Crl) No.142 of 2021 - 3 -
K. Vinod Chandran & Ziyad Rahman, JJ.
-------------------------------------
W.P(Crl.)No.142 of 2021-S
------------------------------------
Dated, this the 07th day of July, 2021
JUDGMENT
Vinod Chandran, J.
The petitioner was before this Court concerned
with the welfare of his 'second wife' and son, who were
alleged to have been taken away forcefully by respondents 7
to 10 for the purpose of converting the mother and son to
Islam. It was also alleged that through the second wife,
the petitioner was also offered Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees
twenty five lakhs) for converting to Islam. The petitioner
had expressed apprehensions about the life of his second
wife and child and had spoken on the antecedents of
respondents 8 to 10. The attempt was to say that the mother
and son were in the custody of an extremist body.
2. We issued notice and directed the mother and
child to be produced before us. The 7th respondent appears
through Counsel.
3. The police produced the mother and son before
us today. We first talked with the officer, Shri.Shaiju
N.B., Inspector of Police, Thenhipalam, who produced both
before us. He informed us that on investigation it was
found that the mother, who is produced before us, is the
sister of the petitioner's wife. They were living together,
but differences cropped up. The sister of the petitioner's
wife along with her son moved out and have been living
alone separately. It was also stated that the petitioner is
not legally wedded to his sister-in-law. The officer also
informed us that the mother is now working in a Bakery, the
owner of which was a Muslim, and the mother was attracted
by the religion. Now she has converted to Islam and is
undergoing training.
4. Then, we conversed with the lady alone without the
presence of the Police or the learned Counsel appearing for
the parties. The lady told us that she converted to Islam
on her own free will and there was no coercion from
anybody. She also admitted the relationship with the
petitioner, but alleged that the petitioner has not been
looking after herself and the child for some time. She also
admits that there is no valid marriage between herself and
the petitioner. She is working in a Bakery and has now
converted to Islam. She asserted that her son was not
converted.
5. We, later, called the son and talked with him
alone without anybody's presence. He also narrated the same
story and wants to be with the mother. He said that he has
not been converted to Islam and has not yet decided.
6. We also heard the learned Counsel appearing for
the parties. The learned Counsel for the petitioner
requested that the petitioner and his wife, who is the
sister of the alleged detenue, are present and they may be
allowed to interact with the petitioner's second wife and
son, together and alone. We permitted that and they
interacted for more than an hour in an empty Court Hall.
7. We again interacted with the mother and son. We
first called the boy and interacted with him. He was
slightly confused and was choking, in which circumstance we
specifically asked him whether he wanted to tell us
anything specifically about any difficulties faced by him.
He told us that he has no difficulties, but his interaction
with the petitioner and family saddened him. Then we asked
whether he and his mother are facing any threats or undue
coercion which he categorically denied. He informed us his
decision that he would like to go with his mother. We then
talked to the lady and she expressed her desire to live by
herself along with her son. In these circumstances, we do
not find any reason to keep the writ petition pending.
8. When we talked to the mother, we again asked
whether she had any fears or apprehensions which she
wants to share with us. She told us that the son's studies
are being interrupted due to frequent interference by
outsiders and even the media. We perfectly understand this,
because the moment we issued notice, which the Court
usually does in petitions seeking a writ of habeas corpus;
unless there are very compelling circumstances otherwise,
there appeared columns in the media with an innuendo that
the mother and child are in the custody of extremist
bodies. We are saddened and dismayed because such
outbursts, without verifying the ground realities, only
results in polarization of communities, which civil society
can ill-afford. We, hence, direct the jurisdictional Police
that if a complaint is raised by the subject-lady before
the Police of any harassment, the Police shall take
immediate action to ensure that the mother and son are
allowed to live their life without undue interference and
harassment.
9. The petitioner's Counsel asked for an interim
custody of the child for some days. However, we are of the
opinion that in the present circumstances, that is not
conducive. If there is any dispute on custody, that is to
be agitated before the Family Court. We leave liberty to
either parties to agitate such cause before the appropriate
Family Court.
The writ petition would stand dismissed. No costs.
Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN
JUDGE
Sd/-
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
JUDGE
Vku/-
APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.)NO.142/2021
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DATED 10.6.2021 ALONG
WITH THE F.I. STATEMENT IN CRIME NO.207/2021 OF
THENHIPALAM POLICE STATION.
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENTS DATED 10.6.2021
BY THE DETENUE SMT. SHINI BEFORE THE HON'BLE
MAGISTRATE, PARAPPANANGADY.
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENTS DATED 10.6.2021
BY THE DETENUE MR. AKASH BEFORE THE HON'BLE
MAGISTRATE, PARAPPANANGADY.
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT THROUGH E-MAIL
ON 16.6.2021 ALONG WITH E-MAIL RECORD.
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS PAPER REPORT DATED
28.6.2021 OF THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS.
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF REPORT DATED 12.7.2012 OF THE
NEW INDIAN EXPRESS.
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS PAPER REPORT DATED
26.7.2016 OF THE INDIAN EXPRESS.
Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS PAPER REPORT DATED
26.8.2017 OF THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS.
