WP(Crl.)/640/2012 of BEELA SABU Vs THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE on 31 December 2012

JUDGMENT

Pius C. Kuriakose, J

On considering this Writ Petition wherein the petitionerwho is the wife of one Sabu Mathew alleges that herhusband is illegally detained by R4, his father, we passedthe following order on 20/12/12:- “Not admitted. The State Public Prosecutortakes notice on behalf of R1 to R3. R3 is directedto depute a CPO in plain clothes to the house ofR4 for conducting an enquiry into the allegationthat Sri.Sabu Mathew, the husband of thepetitioner is illegally detained by R4.”

2. Today it is submitted by Sri.Biju Meenattoor, the learned Government Pleader that the petitioner's allegationthat her husband Sabu Mathew is illegally detained by hisfather R4 is not at all correct. According to him, as directedby this Court, a senior Civil Police Officer by name AbduRahiman was deputed for conduct of an enquiry. In the above enquiry the statements of several witnesses wererecorded. The enquiry reveals that the allegation that SabuMathew is illegally detained by the fourth respondent isabsolutely incorrect. On the contrary the enquiry revealedthat the petitioner and her husband Sabu Mathew residedtogether only for just one year out of their married life whichis seven years old. The enquiry also revealed that Sri.SabuMathew is presently residing in a rented building belongingto Jacob Chamakkalayil at Marayikkal, Kannara Post,Pattikkad in Thrissur District. The enquiry further revealedthat the husband of another lady by name Sreeja has filed acomplaint on 24/11/12 stating that his wife Sreeja left himalong with Sabu, the husband of the petitioner. The reportsubmitted by the Sub Inspector of Police, Meenangadi PoliceStation together with the enquiry report submitted bySri.Abdu Rahiman Senior CPO 1166 and statements recordedby Sri.Abdu Rahiman of various witnesses are producedbefore us. The reports and the statements will form part ofthe record of this Writ Petition. The only question which

-3-

arises for decision is whether there is warrant for issuing theWrit of Habeas Corpus sought for on the basis of theallegation that Sri.Sabu Mathew the petitioner's husband isillegally detained by his father the fourth respondent. Theabove question, according to us, can be answered only inthe negative. We do so. The Writ Petition is dismissed. Thisjudgment, however, will not stand in the way of thepetitioner pursuing other remedies available to her beforethe competent Family Court.

Sd/-PIUS C. KURIAKOSEJUDGE

kns/-

Sd/-BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPHJUDGE

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE