Mohanan, J.
The petitioner in the above writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is praying to issue a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents 2 to 4 to produce the body of the petitioner's daughter, namely Anitta, before this Court. According to the petitioner, his family consists of his wife and two children, including the alleged detenue herein and a son aged 14 years, namely Basil, who is a physically and mentally challenged boy and undergoing treatment for the same. According to the petitioner, his daughter, the alleged detenue, was studying for 4th semester B.Com. Degree in CET College at Irapuram and himself and his wife were bringing up their daughter with great expectation and the entire hope of the family was on their daughter. However, their daughter Anitta, the alleged detenue, was found missing from 19/11/2014 onwards and he preferred a complaint before the Puthencruz police station and the police, on enquiry, found that the daughter of the petitioner had gone along with the 4th respondent and they were intercepted by the police and produced in the said police station. But, due to the interference of certain politicians, the police did not permit the girl to go along with the petitioner. So, according to the petitioner, thereafter his daughter is under the illegal detention of the 4th respondent, who belongs to Hindu Pulaya Community and the family members of the 4th respondent illegally detained the daughter of the petitioner.
2. When the above writ petition came up for admission, by order dated 8/10/2014, while issuing notice to the 4th respondent, he was directed to produce the detenue before this Court and the police were directed to see that the 4th respondent had complied with the above direction. When the case is taken up today, the learned Additional Director General of Prosecutions submitted that the detenue is produced.
3. Thus, we heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the 4th respondent and we have also heard the learned Additional Director General of Prosecutions and we have also interacted with Miss. Anitta, the alleged detenue.
During the course of our interaction with the said Anitta, she submitted before us that she is a second year B.Com. student studying in CET College, at Irapuram and she was in love with the 4th respondent and the marriage between herself and the 4th respondent was registered under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act on 19/11/2014 before the Marriage Officer at the Office of the Sub Registrar at Puthencruz. It is also her case that in the wedlock with the 4th respondent she became pregnant and she is carrying now. When we put a specific question to the detenue, as to whether she is under the illegal custody of anybody, she submitted that she is not under the illegal custody of anybody including the 4th respondent and she volunteered to go along with the 4th respondent and accepted him as her husband and now residing along with him as his wife.
4. In a proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, when the allegation is that the detenue is under the illegal detention of the respondent, this Court is expected to enquire into whether such allegation is false or not. The detenue herself submitted before us that she is not under the illegal detention of anybody. When we put to the detenue, on the basis of the request by the petitioner, as to whether she is prepared to go with the petitioner for one week, or whether she is prepared to talk with the petitioner, her answer was negative. She submitted that she has nothing to talk with the petitioner. Thus, from the mouth of the detenue herself, we heard that she is not under the illegal confinement of anybody and, therefore, this Court lacks jurisdiction to continue with this proceedings.
In the result, as the detenue, Miss. Anitta, the daughter of the petitioner herein, is not under the illegal custody of anybody, no orders are warranted in this proceedings. Accordingly, this petition is closed.
Sd/-
(V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE)
Sd/-
(K.HARILAL, JUDGE)
okb.