The individual’s right to freedom outweighs claims of illegal detention without sufficient evidence.

JUDGMENT

A.K.Basheer, J.

Petitioner claims that he was in love with Ms.Sunujin, the daughter of respondent No.5. According to the petitioner, Ms.Sunujin had left her parental home on January 23, 2008 and come along with him pursuant to their decision to get married. Thereafter, on January 31, 2008 their marriage was conducted at Chamundi Devi Temple at Panavila “as per the rites and rituals prevailing in the Hindu community in the presence of relatives of the petitioner”. It is further contended by the petitioner that Ms.Sunujin is aged 20 years.

2. The case of the petitioner is that on February 6, 2008 at about midnight, respondents 3 and 4, the Sub Inspectors of Police of Vizhinjam Police Station and Nithravila Police Station respectively, visited the residence of a relative of his, where he had been staying with Ms.Sunujin, and informed him that a “man missing” complaint had been received from respondent No.5. Petitioner and Ms.Sunujin were taken to Nithravila Police Station. Ms.Sunujin's relatives came to the police station on the next day, viz.

February 7, 2008 and informed the petitioner that since Ms.Sunujin is pursuing her studies for the degree course, she may be allowed to reside with her parents so that she can complete her course. Petitioner further contends that her relatives “promised” him that after completion of the course Ms.Sunujin would be allowed to join the petitioner.

3. Petitioner contends that Ms.Sunujin is due to complete her course in March, 2009. But when he tried to contact Ms.Sunujin during the last week of December, 2008 her parents reacted “indifferently” and threatened the petitioner of dire consequences if he made any such further attempt. It is in the above circumstances that the petitioner has preferred this writ petition alleging that Ms.Sunujin is in illegal detention of her father (respondent No.5) who is a police officer in Tamil Nadu service.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the materials available on record, we are not satisfied that this is a fit case in which notice should be issued to the respondents.

5. Admittedly, Ms.Sunujin is living with her parents. Even assuming Ms.Sunujin is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner as claimed by him, it is the admitted position that she had been living with her parents for the last one year. Petitioner has no case that Ms.Sunujin has not been attending classes. Obviously she is a free individual. If she had been under detention, she would have definitely informed the petitioner, if she cared for him. In that view of the matter, it cannot be assumed that Ms.Sunujin is in illegal custody.

There is no merit in the writ petition and therefore, it is dismissed in limine.

A.K.BASHEER (JUDGE)

THOMAS P.JOSEPH (JUDGE)

vns