Kerala High Court
Nishad A vs State Of Kerala on 14 January, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 24TH POUSHA, 1943
WP(CRL.) NO. 537 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
NISHAD A
AGED 31 YEARS
S/O.ABDUL SALAM, VADAKKEVILA, PALLIMURI, PORUVAZHY
VILLAGE, SOORANADU P.O, KUNNATHUR THALUK, KOLLAM
DISTRICT, PIN-690 520, REPRESENTED BY ITS P/A.
HLDER AND MOTHER SMT.JUBABATH, AGED 58, W/O.ABDUL
SALAM, VADAKKEVILA, PALLIMURI, PORUVAZHY VILLAGE,
SOORANADU P.O, KUNNATHUR THALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT,
PIN-690 520.
BY ADV R.SURAJ KUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF
KERALA, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
KOLLAM-691 001.
3 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
SOORANADU POLICE STATION, SOORANADU, KOLLAM
DITRICT, PIN-690 520.
4 ANTON KUMAR
2, POUND ROAD, VADIVEESWARAM, NAGARKOVIL,
AUGUSTHEESWARAM, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU,
PIN-629 702.
5 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
NAGARKOVIL, AUGSTHEESWARAM, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT,
TAMIL NADU.
IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL. R5 VIDE ORDER DATED
03/01/2022 IN WP(CRL).
SRI.E.C.BINEESH, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
WP(Crl)No.537/2021 - 2 -
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 14.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(Crl)No.537/2021 - 3 -
K.VINOD CHANDRAN & ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A,JJ.
---------------------------------------------
WP(Crl) No.537 of 2021
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th January, 2022
JUDGMENT
Vinod Chandran, J.
The petitioner is a husband, who seeks the
release of his wife from the illegal custody of her
parents. The father of the alleged detenue is impleaded
as the 4th respondent. The petitioner asserts that he
married the daughter of the 4th respondent in 2016 under
the Special Marriage Act, since they belong to two
different religions. The petitioner also alleged that the
4th respondent is a very influential person and it was
after getting anticipatory bail, as evidenced from Ext.P3
that the petitioner and the 4th respondent could get
married. They were living in the house of the 4th
respondent and the wife had appeared before the High
Court of Madras, where the father had filed an
application alleging illegal detention by the petitioner.
The alleged detenue on appearance, submitted that she was
not under illegal custody and had voluntarily left her
home to marry the petitioner. It is also submitted that
on 23.05.2021, the alleged detenue left for her parental
home on the pretext that her mother is not keeping well.
Later, she expressed her wish to join for an MBA Course
at Nagarcoil and sought for her certificates. After that
there is no contact, is the allegation.
2. Since the alleged detenue was in the State of
Tamil Nadu, we impleaded the SHO, Nagarkovil,
Agastheeswaram, Kanyakumari District who has the
jurisdiction over the address of the 4th respondent. We
directed that a statement be obtained from the alleged
detenue, regarding the allegations in the writ petition
through a woman police officer, without interference of
her family.
3. Today, a report has been filed by the Inspector
of Police, along with a statement of the alleged4
detenue. We also see that A.Xavier Pandyan, Assistant
Director of Prosecution-cum-Additional Prosecutor,
Nagarkovil and Smt.C.Kanmani, Inspector of Police, All
Women Police Station, Nagarkovil are present before us.
We interacted with the said officer and the APP. We were
informed that the Inspector of Police had interacted with
the alleged detenue in total privacy, in her chambers and
recorded the statement, as has been stated in the report
filed before us. The statement of the alleged detenue
indicates that she had been in her matrimonial home from
2016 to 29.08.2020. She submits that her stay in the
matrimonial home was miserable and she was constantly
subjected to torture and cruelty. There was constant
demand of dowry and the physical, mental and verbal ill-
treatment continued unabated. Eventually she was chased
out of her matrimonial home on the demand of dowry.
Contrary to what the petitioner submits, the alleged
detenue states that she left the matrimonial home on
29.08.2020 and now she is at her parental home. She is
continuing with her studies and asserts that she is not
under any illegal custody. She has also lodged a
complaint against the petitioner and his family members
under the Domestic Violence Act and raising allegations
of demand of dowry.
4. We are satisfied, on going through the
statement, that there is no illegal confinement of the
subject and there is absolutely no necessity to issue a
Writ of Habeas Corpus. We close the writ petition, but
however, clarify that the statements made herein-above
are only the allegations and counter allegations made by
the parties; which need not be taken as observations made
by us. We so clarify, since the subject has put into
motion the criminal law and the petitioner too has his
own remedies to resolve the marital disputes before the
appropriate forum. We make it clear that our judgment
only finds no reason to invoke the extra ordinary remedy
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ
petition stands closed.
Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE
sd/-
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A, JUDGE
lgk/14.01.2022
APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) 537/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF MARRIAGE
DATED 3/3/2016.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 16/2/2006
IN CRL.MP NO.386/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE
SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2/2/2016 IN
CRL.MP NO.336/2016.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 6/12/2021.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
20/12/2021.
Exhibit P5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 21/12/2021
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
