Kerala High Court
Abdul Samed vs State Of Kerala on 27 May, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU
THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MAY 2021 / 6TH JYAISHTA, 1943
WP(CRL.) NO. 126 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
ABDUL SAMED, AGED 50 YEARS,
C/O.MOHAMED THAYYIL, RESIDING AT THAYYIL HOUSE,
PANG P.O., PULIVETTY, KURUVA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 679 338.
BY ADV P.T.SHEEJISH
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO HOME DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.
2 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 013.
3 CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE
VENJARAMOODU POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695 607.
4 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
VENJARAMOODU POLICE STATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695 607.
5 MUBEENA, AGED 30 YEARS,
W/O.ABDUL SAMED, PALLIKUNNIL THADATHARIKATHU VEEDU,
KOONANVENGA P.O., PULLAMPARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 695 568.
SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
27.05.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(Crl) No.126 of 2021
2
ALEXANDER THOMAS & K. BABU, JJ.
----------------------------------------------------
W.P.(Crl) No.126 of 2021
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of May, 2021
JUDGMENT
Alexander Thomas, J.
The prayer in the aforecaptioned criminal writ proceedings, filed under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India are as follows:-
"i) Isssue a writ of habeas corpus or any other appropriate writ or
order or direction, directing the respondents 1 to 4, to produce the
corpus of the boy, named as T. Amjad, aged 04 years, who is the son
of the petitioner, before this Hon'ble Court, in the interest of justice.
ii) Grant such other relief as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and
proper in the circumstances of this case."
2. Heard Sri.P.T. Sheejish, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner, and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, the learned Public Prosecutor
appearing for official respondents 1 to 4. In the nature of the orders proposed
to be passed by this Court in this petition, notice to contesting respondent
No.5 will stand dispensed with.
3. The case projected in this petition is to the effect that the
petitioner is a Muslim who had married a lady and the said marital
relationship is subsisting and that there are two children born in the said
wedlock of the petitioner with the said lady. That, thereafter the petitioner
aged 50 years, has solemnised a second marriage with the 5 th respondent.
W.P.(Crl) No.126 of 2021
Further that the alleged detenue, T. Amjad, aged 4 years, is the child born in
the wedlock of the petitioner with the 5 th respondent. That the 5th respondent
had eloped with another man named Sudheer and the child is illegally
detained at the instance of the 5th respondent and the said man.
4. Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, the learned Public Prosecutor, appearing
for official respondents 1 to 4 would submit on the basis of instruction of the
4th respondent-Station House Officer, that the police officials concerned have
conducted enquiries on the petitioner's case and has recorded the statement
of the 5th respondent and that the alleged detenue, T. Amjad, is also with the
5th respondent and the statement of the 5 th respondent has also been
recorded, whereby she has stated that due to extreme marital discord with the
petitioner, she was constrained to go away from the marital home and that
she is now residing in the house of her deceased parents and that she, as a
mother, has every right to have custody of the minor son T. Amjad, who is
aged only 4 years and that the custody of the child is not illegal. Further she
has also stated before the Police that she has no objection in the petitioner
visiting the child appropriately once in a week after prior appointment.
5. From the abovesaid submissions it appears that, the case of illegal
detention is not seriously disclosed in this case and if at all the petitioner has
any disputes or issues with the 5th respondent as regards the custody of their
minor son, it is for him to workout such legally justiciable grievances before
W.P.(Crl) No.126 of 2021
the Family Court concerned.
6. However, taking note of the fact that the petitioner is the mother
of the child, it is ordered that the 4th respondent-Station House Officer, as a
one time measure, may ensure that the petitioner may be given an
opportunity to interact with the child in the place where the 5 th respondent
and the child are now residing, in the presence of a woman police official. In
that regard, the 4th respondent may make appropriate arrangements after co-
0rdinating both the petitioner and the 5 th respondent and the time and place
of the said visit in the presence of the woman police officer may be informed
to the petitioner and the 5th respondent. Thereafter, in case, the petitioner
has any legally justiciable grievances it is for him to work out his remedies in
accordance with law and before the appropriate Forum like Family Court, etc.
With these observations and directions the above writ petition
(criminal) will stand finally disposed of.
Sd/-
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS,
JUDGE
Sd/-
Sd/-
K. BABU,
JUDGE
Skk//27052021
05/27/21
W.P.(Crl) No.126 of 2021
ANNEXURE
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF THE
DETENUE.
EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE 5TH
RESPONDENT AND THE DETENUE.
EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
28/03/2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT
DATED 09/04/2021 ISSUED BY THE VENJARAMOODU
POLICE.
