Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 11724
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P. B. Suresh Kumar, C.S. Sudha, JJ
C.S PRASHOBAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(Crl.) 624 2023
VISHNU BHUVANENDRAN, RESHMA UNNIKRISHNAN, MIRAL K.JOY, B.ANUSREE, K.A.ANAS, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
In a habeas corpus petition, voluntary statements from the alleged detainee regarding their freedom undermine claims of unlawful detention.
Headnote:
Habeas Corpus - Detention of Individual - No Specific Acts Referenced - Petition Dismissed
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a habeas corpus writ to produce his father, Sreedharan Nair, allegedly detained against his wishes. The court ordered Nair's production via video conference.
Finding of the Court:
Sreedharan Nair stated he was not under restraint and residing voluntarily. The court determined the petition was mischievous and dismissed it.
Issues: Whether Sreedharan Nair was unlawfully detained and whether the court should permit the petitioner to interact with him.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found no unlawful detention as Sreedharan Nair confirmed his voluntary residence and desire not to interact with the petitioner.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed.
J U D G M E N T
P.B.Suresh Kumar, J.
This writ petition(Crl) is instituted seeking a writ of habeas corpus directing the official respondents to produce the father of the petitioner, Sreedharan Nair, allegedly detained by respondents 4 and 5 against his wishes, and to set him at liberty.
2. Pursuant to the interim order passed by this court on 30.06.2023, the official respondents caused the production of Sreedharan Nair before this court via video conferencing. We have interacted with Sreedharan Nair, and in the course our interaction, Sreedharan Nair stated that he is not under any sort of restraint or detention, and he is residing at a particular place on his own volition. Sreedharan Nair also stated that he does not want to divulge the place where he is residing, to maintain his privacy. Even though the petitioner sought permission of the court to interact with Sreedharan Nair, inasmuch as Sreedharan Nair took the stand that he does not want to interact with the petitioner, we are constrained to decline the aforesaid request of the petitioner.
In the light of the statements given by Sreedharan Nair, we are of the view that this writ petition (Crl) is mischievous and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.
Sd/-
C.S.SUDHA, JUDGE.
Mn APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) 624/2023 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
14.03.2023 IN WP(C) NO. 4335/2023 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE
4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE RDO, THIRUVANNATHAPURAM, DATED 17.01.2023 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25.03.2023 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BY THE PETITIONER FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 01.05.2023 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE SMS MESSAGE WHICH CAME IN PETITIONER'S MOBILE NUMBER .
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 16.05.2023 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE STATE POLICE CHIEF Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF A RECENT PHOTOGRAPH OF THE DETENUE ALONG WITH THE PETITIONER'S WIFE AT AZAD HOTEL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE DETENUE DOING PEDICURE
