PARVATHY Vs. SUPERINTENDENT CORPORATION RELIEF CENTRE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A lady by name Santhi was arrested by the police on the alleged charge of theft. The police also found along with her a minor boy aged between four and six years. When the accused Santhi was produced before the Judicial First Class Magistrates Court-IT, Ernakulam the learned Magistrate remanded the accused to police custody and as none came forward to claim custody of the child directed to be sent to the Home for Destitutes, Palluruty, Ernakulam maintained by the first respondent to look alter aged and infirm. Petitioner herein claims to be the grandmother of the child and she has approached this court seeking for a direction to the first respondent to produce the child before this court and set him at liberty.

(2.) We issued notice to the respondents. Advocate Sri. N.N. Sugunapalan appeared on behalf of the first respondent. The Government Pleader appeared for the 2nd respondent. It is alleged by the petitioner that she belongs to a nomadic tribe in South India and that she earns her livelihood by selling honey, Ayvrvedic medicinal roots and leaves etc. in public. She travels all over to carryon her avocation. According to her, her elder daughter died at the time of child birth and the child born to her is the child in question and is taken care of by the petitioner. We requested the Government Pleader Smt. Sreelatha to visit the first respondent and report the condition prevailing. She visited the place and reported. After hearing her, we felt that the place where the child is lodged at present does not have a congenial atmosphere. Hence we directed to ascertain the availability of any facility in an orphanage who can take care of the child. She reported that there is an orphanage called Sai Niketan, Monastry Road, run under the auspices of Sri. Ramakrishna Mission. We are informed that Mr. Justice K.P. Radhakrishna Menon (Retd.) is associated with the Ashramom movement. Hence we directed that the child be admitted to an orphanage run by an N.G.O. Sai Niketan, Monastry Road, Near Chavara Cultural, Centre, Ernakulam South. The child was accordingly admitted. The said institution got themselves impleaded as 3rd respondent.

(3.) The learned Government Pleader submitted that on the basis of information furnished by the petitioner about their whereabouts an investigation was made at the address furnished by the petitioner. It turned out to be that they were incorrect. The Government Pleader further submitted that the address furnished by the petitioner does not exist. It is submitted by the Government Pleader that when questioned the petitioner had stated that she is residing at a place called Railway Puramboke colony, Palakkad Railway Station. The police authorities investigated and after investigation it was discovered that there is no such place at Palakkad. According to us even from the very averments in the Original Petition we do not think that the petitioner can claim any permanent address as she describes herself as a nomad. In the circumstances, we do not think that it is proper to leave the child to the custody of the petitioner at this stage as we are not convinced, prima facie, she maybe able to take care of the child in the best interest. We also entertain a doubt about the story of the bereavement of her daughter etc.