Back
2020 Supreme(Online)(KER) 41102
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
K.HARILAL, C.S. DIAS, JJ
SUJITH S., – Appellant
Versus
SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL) – Respondent
WP(Crl.)/58/2020
SRI.M.R.SASITH, SRI.A.V.ARUN PRAKASH, K B RAMANAND, SRI.K.N.RADHAKRISHNAN(THIRUVALLA)
The decision emphasizes the principle that personal autonomy and voluntary choice determine the validity of claims surrounding unlawful detention.
Headnote:
Custody - Marriage - Act Section List - The court examined the legal implications of the marriage under Hindu law and the issue of unlawful detention versus personal choice, leading to a decision to dismiss the writ petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a husband, claimed his wife was illegally detained by her father. The couple married according to Hindu customs, but the wife expressed a desire to live with her father until completing her graduation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the wife was not under unlawful detention and had voluntarily decided to live with her father, dismissing the husband’s claim.
Issues: Whether the wife was unlawfully detained by her father against her will, or if her decision to stay was voluntary.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that personal choice supersedes claims of unlawful detention, especially when the individual expresses a desire to reside elsewhere.
Final Decision: The writ petition is dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 24th day of February 2020 K.HARILAL,J.
According to the petitioner, he is the husband of the detenue and their marriage was solemnized in accordance with the Hindu Religious Customary Rites and Ceremonies at Sreekrishnaswami Temple, Ethithanam. When the 4th respondent came to know about the said marriage, he opposed the same and thereafter, he has confined the detenue into his illegal custody and she is not allowed to cohabit with the petitioner as his wife. Petitioner has prayed for a direction to produce the detenue before this Court and set her free.
2. In compliance with the interim order of this Court, the detenue has been produced before this Court. She admitted that she was in love with the petitioner and thereafter decided to get married at the earliest in accordance with the Hindu Religious Rites and Ceremonies. Consequently, their marriage was solemnized on 31.01.2020 at Ethithanam Sreekrishnaswamy Temple as per the Hindu Religious Ceremonies, under Ext.P1 marriage certificate.
3. According to her, though they are married, there was an understanding that she will cohabit with the petitioner after her graduation. Therefore, she wants to reside along with the 4th respondent herein, her father, and she does not want to go and live along with the petitioner in matrimony. According to her, she is not under the unlawful detention of the 4th respondent, as alleged in the writ petition. The above decision was taken as her own volition. The 4th respondent has not imposed any kind of obstruction on her free and independent life.
4. In view of the statement made before us, we find that the detenue is not under the unlawful detention of the 4th respondent. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the denial of his conjugal rights, by the detenue, he is at liberty to seek appropriate remedies before the Family Court and this judgment will not stand in the way of such proceedings.
Hence this writ petition will stand dismissed.
Sd/-
K.HARILAL
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CETIFICATE ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY, INTHITHANAM SREEKRISHNA SWAMI TEMPLE DATED
06.02.2020 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINANT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 07.02.2020
