JUDGMENT

ANTONY DOMINIC,J.

The petitioner says that her son was married to the 5th respondent, whose father is the 4th respondent. Ext.P1 notice shows that the a girl child was born in the wedlock on 21/10/1998. According to the petitioner, when the child was three years old, the 4th respondent removed the child and the 5th respondent from her matrimonial home. It is alleged by the petitioner that the 5th respondent has subsequently married her paramour and the child is inaccessible to her. It is with this allegation that this writ petition is now filed alleging that the child is in the illegal detention and that the child should be set at liberty.

2. From the facts pleaded in the writ petition itself, it is obvious that the alleged removal of the child along with her mother was some time in 2001, when the child was only 3 years. This is necessarily means that the removal took place almost twelve years back. That apart, when the child was allegedly removed, the mother was also removed along with the child. This, therefore, indicates that W.P.(Crl)No.450/13 2 the child was throughout in the custody of the mother. Therefore, this case does not involve any illegal detention as alleged by