Back
2012 Supreme(Online)(KER) 11562
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, BABU MATHEW P.JOSEPH, JJ
MOHANAN NAIR – Appellant
Versus
CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE – Respondent
WP(Crl.) 410 2012
SRI.SREEKANTH S.NAIR, SRI.B.S.SURESH KUMAR, SRI.M.K.ABUBACKER
The court confirmed the validity of the marriage based on registered documentation, leading to the dismissal of habeas corpus claims.
Headnote:
Marriage - Habeas Corpus - Tamil Nadu Registration of Marriages Act - Sections 1-4 - The court upheld the validity of the marriage certificate under the Act, concluding that the allegations of illegal detention were unfounded, thereby influencing the dismissal of the writ petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner claimed that his daughter was being illegally detained by her husband. The court reviewed evidence including a marriage certificate and a birth certificate.
Finding of the Court:
The court found no basis for the claim of illegal detention, determining that the couple was legally married and dismissing the writ petition while granting visitation rights.
Issues: Whether the marriage between the parties was valid and if there was any illegal detention of the daughter.
Ratio Decidendi: The marriage, as evidenced by the marriage registration certificate, is legally recognized, thus invalidating claims of illegal detention.
Final Decision: Writ petition dismissed with directions for visitation rights.
JUDGMENT
Pius C. Kuriakose, J Read our orders dated 05/09/12, 09/10/12 and
11/10/12. The petitioner accompanied by his wife has brought Vrinda, his daughter over to this Court today. The respondent and his mother, the fourth respondent are also present before us. We interacted with the petitioner and also with respondents 2 and 4.
2. We have considered the various materials placed on record. We have gone through the certificate of registration of marriage issued by the Sub Registrar, Arasaradi under the provisions of Tamilnadu Registration of Marriages Act, 2009 . We have indicated in our order dated 09/10/12 that prima facie the above document will show that Vrinda and Manoj are married. The birth certificate issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths, Neyyattinkara Municipality clearly shows that Manoj has completed the age of 21 on 27/12/11. Under the above circumstances, we hold for the purpose of this Writ Petition that Manoj and Vrinda are duly wedded husband and wife. The principal relief that is sought for in this writ Petition is issuance of Writ of Habeas Corpus on the allegation that Vrinda is illegally detained against her wishes by the second respondent, Manoj. We are convinced from the interaction which we had with Vrinda that the above allegation is absolutely incorrect. We decline the relief and dismiss the Writ Petition. However, we direct respondents 2 to 4 to allow visitorial rights to the petitioner Mohanan Nair and his wife Kusalakumari on their daughter Vrinda at least once in a week whenever Vrinda stays along with them. It shall be the obligation of the second respondent to ensure that Vrinda is able to pursue her engineering studies without break.
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE
