Anwar Fayis vs District Police Chief
2021 Latest Caselaw 15206 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
                                   &
                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL
        TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 29TH ASHADHA, 1943
                        WP(CRL.) NO. 173 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

            ANWAR FAYIS, AGED 23 YEARS,
            S/O.ABDUL NAZAR,
            VELUMULLI THOPPIL HOUSE,
            NJANGATTIRI POST,
            PATTAMBI TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT,
            PIN - 679 303.

            BY ADVS.
            V.JOHN SEBASTIAN RALPH
            B.DEEPAK
            VISHNU CHANDRAN
            RALPH RETI JOHN
            APPU BABU
            SHIFNA MUHAMMED SHUKKUR
RESPONDENTS:

    1       DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF, PALAKKAD,
            DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE,
            PALAKKAD, PIN - 678 001.

    2       DEPUTY SUPERINTNDENT OF POLICE,
            SHORNUR, DYSP OFFICE, SHORNUR,
            PALAKKAD, PIN - 679 121.

    3       STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
            THRITHALA POLICE STATION,
            PALAKKAD DISTRICT,
            PIN - 679 534.
 W.P.(Crl.)No.173 of 2021          2




      4        SAIFU, AGED 38 YEARS,
               KUDIYIL HOUSE, KUMBIDI POST, ANAKARA PANCHAYATH,
               PATTAMBI TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679 553
               (RESIDING WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THRITHALA POLICE
               STATION, PALAKKAD)

      5        MOHAMMED K., AGED 51 YEARS,
               KODIYIL HOUSE, KUMBIDI POST,
               ANAKARA PANCHAYATH, PATTAMBI TALUK,
               PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679 553.


               BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.B.RAMANAND

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(Crl.)No.173 of 2021                    3




                   K. VINOD CHANDRAN & K.HARIPAL, JJ.
                  -------------------------------------
                        W.P.(Crl.)No.173 of 2021
                  -------------------------------------
                  Dated this the 20th day of July, 2021

                                       JUDGMENT

K. Vinod Chandran, J.

The petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus to

release the daughter of respondents 4 & 5 from their

alleged illegal custody. It is stated in the writ

petition that the petitioner and the daughter of the

party respondents are in love and they had decided to

marry. Since the petitioner does not have a decent

financial status comparable to that of the party

respondents, her parents have raised an objection.

2. We directed the learned Senior Government

Pleader to get a statement recorded from the alleged

detenue through a Woman Civil Police Officer as

authorised by the Station House Officer, the 2nd

respondent. The statement dated 09.07.2021 has been

produced along with the report of the SHO. The detenue

admits to the relationship with the petitioner and the

objection raised by her parents that the petitioner does

not have a job or a house. After the parents brought a

proposal for their daughter, the petitioner is said to

have gone to her house to talk to her parents. The

detenue also says that she was informed that the

petitioner had threatened her parents. The detenue was

then residing with her uncle and it is also stated that

her parents have now agreed to marry her off to the

petitioner when he gets a job. She accepts what her

parents have told her and is waiting for the petitioner

to get a job. She also says that now she is not

pressurised to enter into another marriage and that she

is not in any house arrest. She apprehends that it is

only because the petitioner has not seen her or contacted

her for the last four months, he has approached the High

Court.

The High Court, in a writ of habeas corpus, is

not intended to provide a meeting ground for estranged

lovers. There is no valid ground for issuance of a writ

of habeas corpus, since the alleged detenue categorically

stated that she is not in any illegal custody or house

arrest.

We reject the writ petition.

Sd/-

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE

Sd/-

K.HARIPAL, JUDGE

sp/20/07/2021 //True Copy//

P.A. To Judge

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PETITIONER AND THE DETENUE.

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE WHATSAPP CHAT DATED 23-01-2021 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE DETENUE.

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29-06-2021 IN CMP NO.1342/2021 ON THE FILES OF JFCM COURT, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.