Antony Dominic, J. The first petitioner claims to be the mother of Aparna, aged 10 years and the 2nd petitioner claims to be the mother of Amulya, aged 15 years. According to the petitioners, their children were entrusted with the custody of the 6th respondent and that the 5th respondent was a regular visitor there. It is also stated that the 5th respondent was friendly with the Director of the 6th respondent. It is alleged that on 11.02.2014, the 5th respondent called the Director and demanded the children to be handed over to him and that the management of the 6th respondent is understood to have transferred the five girl children to a nearby convent, St. Joseph Fathima Bhavan, Koonammavu run by the nuns. It is also alleged that thereafter, the children were forcefully taken away and the 5th respondent got assistance from the police to do so. According to the petitioners, in the process, apart from their children, three other children by names Amala, Amiya and Athulya, aged 12 years, 10 years and 9 years respectively were transferred from the 6th respondent and the convent. According to the petitioners, the whereabouts of the children were kept as a close secret and that they could not trace out the children. It is in these circumstances, suspecting foul play and alleging that the children were illegally detained, this writ petition is filed with a prayer to issue a writ of habeas corpus.
2. Considering the nature of allegations, when the matter came up for consideration on 22.05.2014, this Court directed the learned Government Pleader to obtain instructions in the matter.
3. Accordingly, when the case was taken up today, the learned Additional Director General of Prosecution made available a report of the 3rd respondent, which shows that the children were initially in the custody of the 6th respondent and that the welfare officer of the Social Welfare Department visited the place and ordered shifting of the 5 children. It is stated that under the orders of the child welfare committee, the children were shifted to St. Joseph Fathima Bhavan, an orphanage at Koonammavu. It is also stated that subsequently, due to certain developments, the child Amala was produced before the Child Welfare Committee on 21.03.2014 and under the orders of the said Committee, the aforesaid child was entrusted to Drisya Karunya Kendram at Arookutty in Alappuzha District. It is also stated that later the authorities of the orphanage mentioned above, produced the remaining four children before the Child Welfare Committee and that under the orders of the Child Welfare Committee, the four children were also shifted on 31.03.2014 to Valsalya Bhavan at Thammanam in Ernakulam District where they are now residing.
4. Evidently, the shifting of the children from the custody of the 6th respondent to the orphanage and from the orphanage to the places mentioned in the previous paragraphs was based on the directions of the welfare officer of the Social Welfare Department and the Child Welfare Committee, Ernakulam. If that be so, the retention of the children in the places where they are now residing, cannot be said to be a case of illegal detention as contemplated in law justifying entertainment of a writ petition with the prayer for habeas corpus. On the other hand, if as a natural guardian of the children concerned, the petitioners want to enforce their rights, it is open to them to work out their remedies before the appropriate forum.
With that liberty, this writ petition is dismissed.
sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE.
sd/- ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE.
rv //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE