PRASAD KUMAR P P Vs. C N RAVINDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In both these Original Petitions a common question arises and accordingly they are disposed of by a common judgment.

(2.) The question involved in O.P.No. 3771 of 1992 is as to whether the petitioner is entitled to maintain a petition for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus for the production of a girl, Deepa Ravindran, who is the daughter of the 1st respondent. The further question to be decided is as to whether the custody of a parent in the circumstances can be said to be unlawful, warranting interference by this Court.

(3.) Petitioner alleges in his petition that himself and Deepa Ravindran were neighbours and that they have been in love for long ever since their childhood. The parents and other relatives were not agreeable to their relationship and on .11-3-1992, petitioner and Deepa eloped from their respective houses and were staying with the petitioner's mother's sister's daughter at a place called Narakathodu. It is further alleged in the petition that they entered into a registered marriage agreement (No.42/82) dated 12-3-1992 before the Sub Registrar's Office, Thengana; a copy of the above agreement is produced as Ext. P1. According to the petitioner, they became husband and wife by execution of that registered document and they were residing as such in his sister's house at Narakathodu. While so, on 16-3-1992, father of Deepa and two other persons represented to them that they will conduct a formal marriage between the petitioner and Deepa and on that pretext took Deepa also along with them, who is now residing with her parents. According to the petitioner, the representation made by the 1st respondent was only a ruse to take Deepa Ravindran out of the custody of the petitioner and she is kept in illegal custody against her wish by the respondents. The 1st respondent is the father of Deepa and the 2nd respondent is his sister's son.