MANISH MOHAN Vs. GOPALAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, claiming that he was in love with the 2nd respondent, approached this Court and submits that she is under the illegal custody of the 1st respondent, who is none other than the father of the 2nd respondent, the alleged detenue. According to the petitioner, the 2nd respondent and himself were in love from 2012 onwards and at that time he was a B.Com. student in the Co-operative College, Thodupuzha and the 2nd respondent was working as a Teacher in the said college. It is also averred that the brothers and relatives of the 2nd respondent are against their affairs and they threatened the petitioner. It is also alleged that on the basis of the complaint preferred by the relatives of the 2nd respondent, he was suspended from the college and even in the year 2013 the parents of the 2nd respondent asked her to stop the job in the college and accordingly she gave up the job during November 2014. Hence, according to the petitioner, she could not continue her job because of the interference of her relatives including the parents. It is further alleged that the 1st respondent and the relatives of the 2nd respondent had not permitted the petitioner to contact her and he was assaulted by the brother of the 2nd respondent. Thus, it is the case of the petitioner that all of his attempt to contact the 2nd respondent was defeated by the 1st respondent and his henchmen and the 2nd respondent was forcibly prevented from contacting the petitioner. In para-4 of the petition, it is averred that, "The petitioner had seen that the 2nd respondent was kept in a closed room in the residence of the 1st respondent. Then the petitioner had tried to talk to the 2nd respondent and seeing the same the brother of the 2nd respondent assaulted the petitioner with the aid of his friends." It is also seen averred that the relatives of the 2nd respondent is now pressurising the 2nd respondent to forget the petitioner and for marriage with another man. Thus, according to the petitioner, the 2nd respondent is now unlawfully detained in the custody of the 1st respondent, even though she is a major woman. So, it is prayed to issue a writ of habeas corpus commanding the third respondent to produce the 2nd respondent, namely Sunithamol, before this Court.

(2.) When the above writ petition came up for admission and while admitting and issuing notice, the 2nd respondent is directed to appear before this Court on this date along with her father, the 1st respondent, and the 3rd respondent, the Sub Inspector of Police, Thodupuzha, is also directed to see that the respondents 1 and 2 have complied with the above direction.

(3.) In pursuance to the above direction, the 2nd respondent appeared in person before us along with her husband.