Antony Dominic, J. Petitioner has filed this writ petition alleging that his wife and two minor children are being illegally detained by respondents 3 and 4 with the assistance of the 5th respondent. On that basis, he seeks a writ of habeas corpus to set them at liberty.
2. In para 4 and 5 of the writ petition, it is averred thus;
“4. It is respectfully submitted that the said Sheenu was a habit of short tempering and she was adamant that the petitioner shall co-habit with her at her residence at Asamannoor. With respect to this issue, the said Sheenu was always creating problems in the family, so as to compel the petitioner to shift to her own home. But the petitioner was not ready for the said demand of his wife, since his old aged parents are residing with him and he has to look after them.
5. However, the petitioner taken his wife twice to abroad. There also she was used to create unwarranted problems and wanted to join with her own parents. On 4/11/13 she left the matrimonial house after creating issues and went to her house and stayed there. Then the 2nd child was born and now the baby is 4 months old. Now the petitioner returned from gulf country to join with his wife and children
W.P.(Crl.) No.261/14
: 2 :
and also for conducting Baptism of the 2nd child. Before coming to Ernakulam, the petitioner conducted several mediations through Church Authorities, Panchayat Authorities and friends and relatives, as to lead a peaceful married life. But the respondent Nos.3 to 5 never entertained such a step taken by the petitioner and added fuel to the fire to protract the issue.”
3. Petitioner thereafter proceeded to state that he has already filed OP No.265/14 and G.O.P. No.264/14 before the Family Court, Muvattupuzha for restitution of conjugal rights and for the custody of his children. These petitions are also pending and according to the petitioner, service of notice is not complete. It is at that stage, this writ petition is filed.
4. The averments in the writ petition itself show that the wife of the petitioner has left the matrimonial home on her own on account of the family problems that were prevailing. Further, the petitioner has already moved the Family Court for restitution of his conjugal rights as also for custody of the minor children. In
W.P.(Crl.) No.261/14
: 3 :
such a situation, we are unable to infer a case of illegal detention justifying the entertainment of a writ petition for habeas corpus.
Writ petition is dismissed.
Rp //True Copy// PA to Judge Sd/-
ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE