Back
2007 Supreme(Online)(KER) 9649
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P.R.RAMAN, V.K.MOHANAN, JJ
PREEJA MOHAMMED ASHARDHEEN – Appellant
Versus
ABDUL REHMAN A – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) 228/2007
The court established that allegations of illegal custody must be substantiated with evidence, and matters concerning marriage validity can be pursued in appropriate legal forums.
Headnote:
Custody - Marriage - Special Marriage Act - Section 4 - The court analyzed the validity of the marriage under the Special Marriage Act and the issue of illegal custody, concluding that the allegations were unproven and leaving the marriage validity question open for other legal forums.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner alleges that her husband is in illegal custody of the respondents after they both married under the Special Marriage Act. The petitioner claims that she was restrained from entering their residence and that her husband is under illegal custody after leaving their shared residence.
Finding of the Court:
The court investigated the credibility of the petitioner's claims and interacted with the alleged detenu, who asserted that he was living with relatives voluntarily and denied any illegal custody, leading the court to conclude that there was no proof of unlawful detention.
Issues: Whether the husband was under illegal custody by the respondents and the validity of the marriage under the Special Marriage Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found no evidence supporting the allegation of illegal custody, thus dismissing the claim while leaving the issue of marriage validity for resolution in an appropriate legal forum.
Final Decision: The writ petition is closed without a finding on the validity of marriage.
JUDGMENT
Raman, J.
Preeja Mohammed Ashardheen, the petitioner herein, complains that her husband, Mohammed Ashardheen, is under the illegal custody of the party respondents. It is her further case that while the petitioner was working as Administrative Officer in a private concern at Thiruvananthapuram and the detenu was working in Government M.G.P. Project, they fell in love and subsequently they married as per the Special Marriage Act and has produced Ext.P1. Subsequent to the marriage the alleged detenu along with the petitioner stated to have gone to the house of the party respondents and they restrained the petitioner from entering into the house using force and abusive words. Thereafter, the petitioner along with the alleged detenu went to the house of the petitioner's Uncle at Thodupuzha and lived there as husband and wife. At that time the detenu got a job at Ernakulam. On 28/7/2007 Mohammed Ashardheen left the house where he was WP(Crl).No.228/2007 residing along with the petitioner; but did not return back. Petitioner suspected that the alleged detenu is under the illegal custody of the party respondents. A complaint made to the police however was not fruitful.
Hence this petition.
2. Urgent notice was issued. Parties appeared. We interacted with the allged detenu, Mohammed Ashardheen. He denies of any valid marriage with the petitioner. Ext.P1 is only agreement and not one issued under the Special Marriage Act . According to him, he is now residing with one of his relatives with free will and on his own volition and is not under the illegal custody. In the circumstances, we find that the allegation contained in the writ petition that Mohammed Ashardheen is under the illegal custody of party respondents is not proved. The other contention regarding the validity or otherwise of the marriage is left open and either party can approach the appropriate Forum for such relief, if they are so advised.
Accordingly, this writ petition is closed.
However, if there is any criminal case initiated at the instance of the petitioner for any of the offence punishable under the Indian Penal Code WP(Crl).No.228/2007 or any other provisions of law, the Police will continue with such proceedings in accordance with law.
P.R.RAMAN, Judge.
V.K.MOHANAN, Judge.
kcv.
