Antony Dominic, J.

1. Petitioner is a doctor by profession, who is now working as medical officer in the District Hospital, Wadakkanchery. According to him, while working in the Elite Mission Hospital, Koorkancherry, he got acquainted with Ms. Greeshma Ullas (hereinafter referred to as the detenue for short) a doctor, who was then working in the hospital as a Resident Medical Officer. The relationship developed into a love affair and they decided to get married. However, this was not approved by the first respondent, the father of the detenue and that thereupon, the first respondent kept her in illegal detention, without even allowing her to report for work or to appear for the post graduate entrance examinations. It is stated that finally he received Ext.P1 letter from the detenue informing him about the illegal confinement and that her life is in peril. Thereupon this writ petition was filed seeking a writ of habeas corpus for the production of the detenue and to set her at liberty.

2. This Court admitted the writ petition and notice was issued to the respondents. In response, the first respondent, the father of the detenue, produced her before us on 31/1/2014. We interacted with her in detail and were prima facie satisfied that there is truth in the allegations of the petitioner. The outcome of our interaction with her was recorded in our order dated 31/1/2014, and the relevant part of it is extracted for easy reference;

“By order dated 27/1/14, this Court issued notice to the parties and also directed production of the detenue. Accordingly, the detenue was produced before us and we interacted with the detenue. In answer to our questions, she confirmed her love affair with the petitioner and also told us that it is her firm decision to get married to the petitioner. She also told us that in order to force her to withdraw from the relationship, for the last three months, she was kept in confinement without allowing her to continue the employment and even refusing to give the mobile phone, which she had. She also told us that all these facilities will be restored only if she agrees for a marriage with somebody else, which was not acceptable to her.

3. Accordingly, on the order of this Court, she was accommodated in a hostel, where she is continuing to stay. Parties also were allowed to give notice under the Special Marriage Act for getting their marriage registered.

4. Subsequently, the first respondent filed his counter affidavit, denying the allegation that he was illegally detaining the detenue and pleading that whatever he has done was for the welfare and well-being of his daughter and in exercise of his parental authority. He has averred in the affidavit thus;

Furthermore, I have found that, she was having more than three mobile phones out of which one mobile phone we could trace out from her room. On tracing the said mobile phone and seeing the continuous messages sent by my daughter on 19/11/13 to the petitioner I apprehend danger to her life if she is let free and the petitioner gets her custody. The messages sent by the alleged detenue reveals the antecedent character of the petitioner and his relationships with other girls. This was confirmed by the nature of replies sent by the petitioner on 19/11/2013.”

5. Further the messages exchanged between the petitioner and the detenue on 19/11/2013 from their mobile phones, have been annexed to the affidavit as Exts. R1(a) and R1 (b) and these messages read thus;

E xt.R1(a) ( messages delivered to the petitioner by the detenue)

Njan onnumalla. Oru potti.big big fool..njan poyal lal parameswarinu nooru pere kittum. Continue ur old happy life..njoy..chathikkapettavarude listil oru penninte per kude.greeshma..its nothing.nthng new to u..as simple as tht.adutha penninod parayan oru silly kadha kude...

How can I trust one like u. Who cheated me even after getting that attached to me.even after realizing my love n me.howww.nthng s papam for u. in ur world.

What validity I have ? H