SREEKESH T Vs. MOHAMMED ASHRAF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Original Petition has been filed for a writ of Habeas Corpus commanding the 1st and 2nd respondents to produce the third respondent before this Court and to release her from their illegal custody and to give the custody of the third respondent to the petitioner. The petitioner has filed this petition as next friend of the third respondent. According to the petitioner, he and the third respondent attained the age of majority. On 24th June 2002, both of them entered into an agreement of marriage and were living together as husband and wife. While so, respondents 1 and 2 and their relatives forcefully took away the third respondent and admitted her in a counselling centre at Ambalamukku near Peroorkada at Thiruvananthapuram in order to give her a counselling to change her attitude towards the petitioner. The third respondent informed the petitioner about her stay at counselling centre and they eloped from there.

(2.) On 20th July 2002, the third respondent's father complained before the fourth respondent. On receiving the complaint, the fourth respondent registered a case for man missing. On 21st July 2002, the fourth respondent arrested the petitioner and the third respondent and produced before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram. Before the learned Magistrate, the third respondent submitted that she wants to live with the petitioner and the learned Magistrate by an order allowed them to live together and thereafter, they were residing together as husband and wife at Kizhavoor Gaurivilam, Mukhthala, Thrikovilvattom Village.

(3.) On 28th July 2002, the first respondent and his relatives went to the residence of the petitioner and told that mother of the third respondent is seriously ill. Without the consent of the petitioner, the first respondent took away the third respondent to her house. The petitioner went to the house of the third respondent and asked the parents to send her with him as they had been living together as husband and wife and they are matured enough to take decision on their life. However, respondents 1 and 2 never allowed the third respondent to come out of the house and they have illegally detained the third respondent in their house.