M.A. Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner has filed this petition to cause production of Ms.D, the daughter of the fourth respondent herein. According to her, the fourth respondent, who is the father of the detenue, is detaining her against her will. The petitioner wants this Court to set the detenue at liberty.

(2.) The detenue was produced before us by the third respondent. The detenue was accompanied by her mother. We had a detailed interaction with both of them. The detenue's mother broke down and requested us to allow her to take her daughter back home. According to her, the writ petitioner had led her daughter astray. She even alleged that her daughter is drug-addicted and she squarely blamed the petitioner for her condition. The stand of the mother is that her daughter requires counselling and rehabilitation.

(3.) Before interacting with the detenue, we were conscious that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Devu G Nair versus The State of Kerala (2024 LiveLaw (SC) 249) had issued a set of guidelines for the courts in dealing with habeas corpus petitions or petitions for police protection. They read as follows: