Rahul Raveendran vs The State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 14057 Ker

W.P.(Crl.)No.157 of 2021              1


                  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
                           WP(CRL.) NO. 157 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
           RAHUL RAVEENDRAN
           AGED 36 YEARS
           S/O.P.K.RAVEENDRANATH,PUTHENPURACKAL
           HOUSE,KAIPPUZHA.P.O, KAIPPUZHA VILLAGE,KOTTAYAM
           DISTRICT.

              BY ADVS.
              ARUN CHANDRAN
              MARIA PAUL


RESPONDENT/S:
     1     THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO
           GOVERNMENT,HOME DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

      2       THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
              ETTUMANOOR POLICE STATION,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686631.

      3       JOHNEY,KANDATHIL HOUSE,VAZHAKALA,ERNAKULAM-682021.

      4       JAISON LUKOSE CHIRAYIL
              THOMSON VILLA 2,ETTUMANOOR,
              KOTTAYAM-686631.


              FOR R3 BY ADV. K.R.VINOD
              FOR R4 BY ADV.V.SRI NATH


OTHER PRESENT:
           SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.B.RAMANAND FOR R1 AND R2


     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.157 of 2021                   2


                                  JUDGMENT

Ziyad Rahman A.A., J.

This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner

praying for issuing a writ of habeas corpus, directing

respondents to produce the body of his friend namely

Thomson Lukose @ Chikku before this Court and set him at

liberty. According to him, he is under illegal detention

of 3rd and 4th respondents who are the father-in-law and

brother of the alleged detenue. When the matter came up

for admission, we issued notice to the respondents and

thereupon 3rd and 4th respondents have appeared and filed

separate counter affidavits disputing the averments

contained in the petition.

2. In both the above counter affidavits, it has

been specifically stated that, the alleged detenue is a

chronic alcoholic and he also addicted to narcotic drugs.

On several occasions, he had undergone de-addiction

treatment at Bishop Vayayil Medical Centre, Moolamattam.

On all such occasions, he resumed alcohol consumption

after the treatment was over. Respondents 3 and 4 allege

that, it was at the instance of the petitioner herein, he

resumed the habit again. Recently, during the month of

May, 2021, the alleged detenue had shown violent

behaviour against his wife, parents and his brother. In

such circumstances, he was taken to the Bishop Vayayil

Medical Centre, Moolamattam again and he was admitted

therein on 25.02.2013. Even now he is under treatment.

They assert that, the petitioner is not in any illegal

detention. His affairs are being looked after by his

wife, brother and father-in-law, and all his requirements

are properly met. Due to his present health condition, it

is not advisable to produce him before this Court. They

also voiced an apprehension that, if the prayers sought

for in this writ petition are allowed, he may again fall

into the company of the petitioner and restart the

ill-habits, as happened on earlier occasions. The learned

Senior Government Pleader confirms the above facts, on

instructions.

3. In such circumstances, we do not think that, the

petitioner is in any illegal custody. The competence of

the petitioner to file a writ petition like this, is also

highly doubtful. As mentioned above, the alleged detenue

is at the moment undergoing treatment, and under the care

and protection of his wife, brother and father-in-law.

The physical condition of the alleged detenue is

discernible from Ext.R3(a) certificate issued from the

hospital.

4. From the materials placed before us, we have no

reason to disbelieve the assertions of the respondents 3

and 4, and the contents in Ext.R3(a) certificate give

credibility to their version. Further, as the petitioner

is with his wife, father-in-law and brother, we have no

reason to treat it as a case of unlawful detention

warranting interference by this Court. The petitioner

failed to bring in any materials which would create any

doubt as to the veracity of the assertions of the

respondents 3 and 4.

In the above circumstances, we find no reason to

entertain this petition and hence it is dismissed.

                      Sd/-                                              Sd/-

          K.VINOD CHANDRAN                                     ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
               JUDGE                                                JUDGE
pkk



                           APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) 157/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

Exhibit P1                   TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 03/06/2021

SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.