NEERAJ.S vs STATE OF KERALA

Court
Kerala High Court

WP(Crl.) No.677/2026 -:1:-
2026:KER:38682
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SOUMEN SEN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SYAM KUMAR V.M.
RD
WEDNESDAY, THE 3 DAY OF JUNE 2026 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1948
WP(CRL.) NO. 677 OF 2026
PETITIONER/S:
NEERAJ S., AGED 28 YEARS
SON OF SUNIL KUMAR,
HAVING PERMANENT RESIDENCE AT ‘REVATHY’
KOONAYIL, VILLAGE & PO S.PARAVUR,
KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN – 691301.
BY ADV. SHRI V. VENUGOPALAN NAIR
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE HOME SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695001.
2 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE,
(STATE POLICE CHIEF)POLICE HEADQUARTERS,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695010.
3 THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF (ALAPPUZHA RURAL)
ALAPPUZHA, KERALA, INDIA,, PIN – 688001.
4 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, HARIPAD POLICE STATION,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN – 690514.
5 SRI. MATHEW, NICE COTTAGE VETTUVENI,
HARIPAD, KARTHIKAPPALLY, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,
PIN – 690514.

WP(Crl.) No.677/2026 -:2:-
2026:KER:38682
6 SMT. LEENA MATHEW,
SPOUSE OF MATHEW, NICE COTTAG VETTUVENI,
HARIPAD, KARTHIKAPPALLY,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN – 690514.
BY ADVS. SRI.AYYAPPAN SANKAR
SMT.S.HRIDYA
SRI.JAYAN JOHN
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K. A. ANAS
THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 03.06.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

WP(Crl.) No.677/2026 -:3:-
2026:KER:38682
SOUMEN SEN, C.J.
and
SYAM KUMAR V.M., J.
------------------------------------------
W.P.(Crl.) No. 677 of 2026
------------------------------------------
rd
Dated this the 3 day of June, 2026
J U D G M E N T
Soumen Sen, C.J.
The interfaith relationship between the petitioner and the
alleged detenue appears to be the cause for the petitioner, who
claims to be in a romantic relationship with the alleged detenue, to
file this petition for habeas corpus on the allegation that the alleged
detenue has been illegally detained by her parents.
2. When this petition was taken up for consideration, it
transpired that the alleged detenue is pursuing her studies at
Pushpagiri Medical College, Thiruvalla, and, as we have been given
to understand, she is presently pursuing a nursing course of
roughly four years' duration, with no restriction on her movement
at present.
3. We interacted with the alleged detenue online. She stated
that her mobile phone is presently with her and that there is no
surveillance by her parents with regard to her communication with

WP(Crl.) No.677/2026 -:4:-
2026:KER:38682
the petitioner. However, she expressed her apprehension that her
parents are not accepting the said relationship and that, in the
event she returns home and resides with them, restrictions may be
imposed on her interaction with the petitioner. She further
expressed her apprehension that she may not be permitted to meet
the petitioner if he, who is presently working abroad, visits Kerala.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
5. It appears that the parents of the alleged detenue have not
accepted the said relationship and do not want their daughter to
continue with the relationship that developed through Instagram. It
is a fact that the relationship originated through Instagram and
that the alleged detenue has met the petitioner only twice. The
parents of the alleged detenue are of the view that it is premature
on her part to decide to establish a long-term relationship with the
petitioner, who is stated to be working abroad. According to them,
the alleged detenue ought to concentrate on her studies, as she has
already lost two precious years, and the period of acquaintance is
too short for her to take such an important decision, which, in their
apprehension, may adversely affect the future of their daughter. It

WP(Crl.) No.677/2026 -:5:-
2026:KER:38682
is further submitted on behalf of the parents of the alleged detenue
th
that the interaction between the petitioner and the 5 respondent,
father of the alleged detenue, was unpleasant.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
alleged detenue has confessed and admitted her strong liking for
the petitioner. The petitioner is well settled and is willing to marry
the alleged detenue and it is further submitted that the alleged
detenue can continue her studies from her in-laws’ house after
marriage. It is submitted that, having regard to the fact that
both the petitioner and the alleged detenue are mature, the parents
of the alleged detenue cannot act or cause any physical restraint
so as to prevent interaction between the petitioner and the
alleged detenue.
7. In our interaction with the alleged detenue, she has clearly
and unequivocally stated that she is mature and she wants to
marry the petitioner. It may not be to the liking of her parents.
Although we feel that she must complete her studies and become
economically independent before choosing a life partner, which, in
our view, is a more mature decision, we cannot rely upon our own

WP(Crl.) No.677/2026 -:6:-
2026:KER:38682
perception of such a relationship of the alleged detenue. The alleged
detenue is mature and she has to take a conscious decision.
Whether she should accept the advice of her parents is for her to
decide, as she alone has to bear the consequences of any wrong
decision. That the decision could go wrong, may not be correct also.
8. We are not here to analyse the bonding that has developed
between the petitioner and the alleged detenue. However, we feel
that the parents of the petitioner and the alleged detenue should
interact and, if required, through a mediator with the assistance of
the Kerala High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre, so that
the present acrimony could be resolved. In the event the alleged
detenue feels that her movement is likely to be restricted if she
visits her home, it is open for her to stay at the nursing hostel
during the entire tenure of her nursing course. The learned counsel
th
for the 6 respondent submitted that all financial and other
facilities required for her stay in the hostel would be provided until
her marriage with the petitioner.
9. In view of the submission that the passport and other
documents of the alleged detenue are in the custody of her parents,

WP(Crl.) No.677/2026 -:7:-
2026:KER:38682
th
we direct the 6 respondent to hand over all the original documents
to the Advocate-on-Record for the petitioner, along with a list of
documents, to be counter-signed by the Advocate-on-Record for
th
both the parties. Any other document in the possession of the 6
respondent, which may be required by the alleged detenue, shall
likewise be made over to the alleged detenue. The college authorities
shall not restrain the petitioner from visiting the alleged detenue in
the hostel or office, upon proper identification and after obtaining
her consent.
With the above, the writ petition shall stand disposed of.
Pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand closed.
Sd/-
SOUMEN SEN,
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
SYAM KUMAR V.M.,
JUDGE
krj

WP(Crl.) No.677/2026 -:8:-
2026:KER:38682
APPENDIX OF WP(CRL.) NO. 677 OF 2026
PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:-
EXHIBIT-P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SENT BY THE
PETITIONER ON 13-4-2026 TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT ALONG
WITH THE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT.
RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS:- NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO C.J.