Back
2016 Supreme(Online)(KER) 11187
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
P.N.RAVINDRAN, DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JJ
FREDERIC XAVIER – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF – Respondent
WP(Crl.) 384 2016
SRI.MVS.NAMBOOTHIRY, SRI.POOVAMULLE PARAMBIL ABDULKAREEM, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER sri.K.B.RAMANAND
The court recognized the autonomy of an adult in deciding her residence, affirming no illegal detention exists.
Headnote:
Habeas Corpus - Marriage -
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a merchant navy employee, seeks the return of his wife who is staying with her parents without revealing their marriage. After filing a habeas corpus petition, the wife comes to court and confirms her desire to be with the petitioner.
Finding of the Court:
The court finds that the wife is a major and not under illegal detention, having chosen to be with the petitioner. The case is thus closed as no further action is required.
Issues: Whether the petitioner’s wife is being illegally detained by her parents or whether she is free to choose her own residence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasizes the autonomy of the wife, acknowledging her legal capacity due to age and sound mental faculties, and finds no evidence of illegal detention.
Final Decision: The writ petition is closed.
JUDGMENT
Dama Seshadri Naidu, J.
The petitioner, a servant in Merchant Navy—a private entity—fell in love with Miss Taniya Varghese, his neighbor aged 22 years. On 4th December 2015, they got married, as is evident from Ext.P2. Despite the marriage, Taniya Varghese continued to stay back in her parental home, evidently, without revealing her matrimonial status to her parents.
2. Though Taniya Varghese continued to be in touch with the petitioner, her parents, unaware that she had been married, made efforts to give her in marriage. Then she revealed her matrimonial status to her parents.
3. Meanwhile, as the petitioner was unable to contact his wife, he filed this petition—Habeas Corpus—seeking his wife’s production from what is said to be her parents’ illegal custody.
4. Today, both the petitioner and Taniya Varghese have appeared before this Court. When interacted, Taniya Varghese told us that her parents tried to send her to Abu Dhabi, where her uncle—father's younger brother—works. On 13th of this month, when she was about to board the flight at Trivandrum Airport, she contacted the petitioner, who informed her that he had already filed this petition. On the petitioner's advice, she left the Airport and reached him; thereafter, they both came to the Court together.
5. From the record, it is evident that despite service of notice, the 4th respondent, Taniya Varghese's father, remained absent.
6. As Taniya Varghese is a major with apparently sound mental faculties, and as she has expressed her willingness to be in the petitioner's company—and, in addition, both have come together to court today—it is evident that she is under no illegal detention of either her parents or anybody else. Under these circumstances, we close this writ petition for it requires no further consideration.
