SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Online)(KER) 40421

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
V.K.MOHANAN, K.HARILAL, JJ
BABU PILLAI – Appellant
Versus
ARUN    Advocate - JAMES ABRAHAM (VILAYAKATTU), ADDL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION,JAMES ABRAHAM (VILAYAKATTU – Respondent
WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) 463/2014



The court recognized voluntary marriage and lawful registration of marriage as valid defenses against claims of illegal custody.

Headnote:

Habeas Corpus - Custody - Gujarat Registration of Marriages Act, 2006 - Concluded the detainee was not in illegal custody and marriage was validly registered.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner claimed that his daughter was missing and under the illegal custody of respondents. A writ of habeas corpus was filed to secure her return.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the daughter voluntarily eloped and married the first respondent, thus not being in illegal custody. The marriage was registered under the Gujarat Registration of Marriages Act, 2006.

Issues: Whether the daughter was in illegal custody and whether the marriage was valid.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that as the detainee was not in illegal custody and voluntarily entered into marriage, the petition did not warrant further inquiry.

Final Decision: The writ petition was closed without further orders.

JUDGMENT

Mohanan, J The petitioner is the father of one Ms.Vyshnavi, aged

19 years. The grievance projected by the petitioner is that the marriage of his daughter is scheduled to be held on 1/12/2014 as per the engagement already conducted. But, thereafter, the 1st respondent and the daughter of the petitioner were found missing from 3/11/2014 and the petitioner came to know that she is under the illegal custody of the respondents 1 to 4. Therefore, it is prayed to issue a writ of habeas corpus commanding the respondents to produce the body of the petitioner's daughter Vyshnavi before this Court and entrust her in the safe custody of the petitioner.

2. When the above writ petition was admitted on

10/11/2014 and while issuing notice to the respondents 1 to 4, we directed them to produce the detenue before this Court on today. Thus, when the case is taken up today, the detenue is produced by the 1st respondent.

3. We have interacted with the detenue and we have also interacted with the petitioner and the 1st respondent. During our interaction, Ms. Vaishnavi, the daughter of the petitioner, submitted that she will complete 19 years of age on 22/11/2014 and she was studying for the First Year D-Farm Course. According to her, she was in love with the 1st respondent, namely Arun, and at her volition she went along with the said Arun and thereafter the marriage between herself and the said Arun was solemnized at Ahmedabad and they have registered their marriage under the Gujarat Registration of Marriages Act , 2006. To substantiate the above claim she handed over a copy of the marriage certificate issued by the Registrar of Marriages, Ward-Kalupur, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. So, according to the detenue, she is not under the illegal custody of anybody.

4. During our interaction with the petitioner, he submitted before us that his daughter had gone along with the 1st respondent, when her marriage was scheduled to be held on 1/12/2014 with another boy. The petitioner is fair enough to submit before us that as his daughter went along with the 1st respondent, for the betterment of her future, it is only just and proper to register the so called marriage between the 1st respondent and his daughter. As per the document furnished to us by the detenue, her marriage with the 1st respondent is registered on 5/11/2014 at Sl. No.4306 of Volume 3 of Register of Marriages maintained under the Gujarat Registration of Marriages Act , 2006. As the detenue herself submitted before us that she is not under the illegal custody of anybody, according to us, there is no scope for further enquiry under this proceedings. The learned counsel for the petitioner, of course, submitted that the marriage between the 1st respondent and the daughter of the petitioner has to be registered. As the detenue herself has produced a certificate showing the registration of their marriage, we are not proposed to pass any orders on the above submission. As the detenue is not under the illegal confinement of anybody, this writ petition is closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top