Kerala High Court
Ajithkumar vs State Of Kerala on 30 September, 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.
THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 8TH ASWINA, 1943
WP(CRL.) NO. 224 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
1 AJITHKUMAR
AGED 57 YEARS
S/O. APPUKUTTAN,
BINDU BHAVANAM, THEMBAMUTTAM, BALARAMAPURAM VILLAGE,
BALARAMAPURAM, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
695 501.
2 MEENA,
AGED 52 YEARS
W/O. AJITHKUMAR,
RESIDING AT BINDU BHAVANAM, THEMBAMUTTAM, BALARAMAPURAM
VILLAGE,
BALARAMAPURAM, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
695 501.
BY ADVS.
V.S.BABU GIREESAN
K.PREETHA JOHN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
HOME AFFAIRS, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 691 012.
3 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 004.
4 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
WP(Crl.) No. 224 of 2021 2
BALARAMAPURAM POLICE STATION, BALARAMAPURAM 695 501.
5 SUHAIL,
AGED 26 YEARS
S/O. SUDHEER,
KOLLAMPARAMBIL VEEDU,
PUNNAPRA VILLAGE, PUNNAPRA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT 688 004.
6 JYOTHIKA,
AGED 18 YEARS
D/O. AJITHKUMAR, FROM BINDU BHAVANAM, THEMBAMUTTAM,
BALARAMAPURAM VILLAGE,
BALARAMAPURAM NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
695 501. NOW RESIDING AT KOLLAMPARAMBIL VEEDU, PUNNAPRA
VILLAGE, PUNNAPRA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT 688 004.
OTHER PRESENT:
R1 TO R4 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.SHAJAHAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(Crl.) No. 224 of 2021 3
JUDGMENT
Ziyad Rahman A.A., J.
The petitioners, who are the parents of
Ms. Jyothika, aged 18 years, have filed this Writ
Petition seeking for issuance of a writ of habeas
corpus directing respondents 1 to 4 to produce their
daughter before this Court and set her at liberty
from the illegal custody of the 5th respondent.
2. The case of the petitioners is that their
daughter, who is suffering from 'dyscalculia' which
is a kind of learning disability, is missing since
18.9.2021. According to petitioners, on that day, she
was sent to Thiruvananthapuram by bus to her parental
home from Thrissur by the sister of the 2nd
petitioner. As she did not reach Thiruvananthapuram
and as the attempts made by the petitioners to
contact her through phone did not materialize, they
informed the police about the same. Accordingly
Ext.P1 F.I.R. was registered by the 4th
respondent/Station House Officer under Section 57 of
the Kerala Police Act. Later, it was revealed that
the daughter of the petitioners who is arrayed as 6th
respondent in the writ petition is in illegal custody
of the 5th respondent, who, by exerting undue
influence over her, had persuaded the alleged detenue
to live along with him. Later, the 5th and 6th
respondents were produced before the Judicial First
Class Magistrate Court-III, Neyyattinkara where the
alleged detenue made a statement expressing her
willingness to go along with the 5th respondent. As
the 6th respondent is a major, she was permitted to go
along with the 5th respondent by the learned
Magistrate. The petitioners submit that the alleged
detenue is under treatment in Government Mental
Health Centre, Thrissur for 'dyscalculia' and the 5th
respondent exerted influence over her by making use
of the said disability. According to the petitioners,
the 5th respondent is keeping the 6th respondent under
illegal detention and this Writ Petition is filed in
such circumstances.
3. When the Writ Petition came up for admission
on 24.09.2021, we passed an order directing the
production of the alleged detenue before the
Secretary, District Legal Services Authority,
Alappuzha at 9.30 a.m. on 30.09.2021 so as to have an
interaction with her through video conferencing.
4. In compliance of the said direction, today,
the alleged detenue appeared before the District
Legal Services Authority, Alappuzha and we had an
interaction with her through video conferencing. She
asserts that she is not under any illegal detention
and she left her parental house voluntarily, without
any compulsion from any person. She stated that she
is intending to live with the 5th respondent and it is
the decision consciously taken by her. We notice
that, the alleged detenue is a major and there is no
dispute on that. Through the interaction we had with
her, we are convinced that she is capable of taking
any decision on her own, despite the fact that she is
reported to have been suffering from 'dyscalculia'.
We have no reason to find that, the decision taken by
her is under any compulsion or under any other
circumstances which makes her decision invalid. Since
she is a major, she has every right to take a
decision on her own and she has already exercised her
rights in this regard. We do not find any
circumstances, warranting invocation of power under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
In such circumstances, we do not find any ground to
entertain this writ petition and accordingly it is
dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
JUDGE JUDGE
pkk
APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) 224/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE F.I.R.,
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN BEFORE THE
LEARNED MAGISTRATE IS EXTRACTED.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER EXTRACTED.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE TREATMENT REPORT ISSUED ON
17.12.2018.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ADMISSION CERTIFICATE .
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE RESULT.
//True copy//
Sd/- PS to Judge
