Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
  • provisions of the Special Marriages Act, 1954,
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Acts
  • provisions of the Special Marriages Act, 1954,

    Premaja Gopinath v. Superintendent Of Police

    C.K Abdul Rehim, J.:— The petitioner is the mother of the alleged detenue, Miss. Deepthi Gopinath. This writ petition was filed on the basis of an allegation that the petitioner's daughter is missing from 24.05.2014 onwards and it was understood that she is under illegal detention of the 3rd respondent, who was her colleague at the work place. It was also alleged that the petitioner's daughter was removed to some unknown place with an intention to compel her to convert to Islam. Even though the police authorities have registered a case with respect to missing of the petitioner's daughter, based on a complaint submitted by the petitioner, no effective steps for investigating the case and to trace out the alleged detenue was taken, is the allegation. Under such circumstances this petition is filed seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus for directing production of the alleged detenue from the illegal confinement of the 3 respondent and to set her at liberty.

    2. Based on orders issued by this court, the alleged detenue was traced out and produced before this court on 24.06.2015 When we interacted with the alleged detenue she said that she had left along with the 3 respondent and was staying in Mumbai since 24.05.2015 onwards. She said that she had embraced Islam and a customary marriage under religious rites was performed at Mumbai. Since this court was not convinced through any authenticated evidence with respect to any approved conversion and with respect to any legally valid marriage, as desired by the alleged detenue and the 3 respondent they were permitted to take steps to solemnize marriage under the Special Marriage Act. As agreed upon by the alleged detenue, till solemnization of a valid marriage, she was permitted to stay along with the petitioner at her parental house.

    3. Today when the case is taken up for consideration, the alleged detenue and the 3 respondent appeared before this court and produced the ‘Certificate of Marriage’ issued by the Marriage Officer (Sub Registrar), Thalassery on 06.08.2015 It would indicate that marriage between the alleged detenue and the 3 respondent was solemnized under the provisions of the Special Marriages Act, 1954, on 05.08.2015 Both the alleged detenue and the 3 respondent said that they are intending to lead marital life and to stay at Mumbai, for the time being, where the 3 respondent is at present employed.

    4. Under the above mentioned circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of by recording the valid marriage established between the alleged detenue and the 3 respondent. The alleged detenue is set at liberty to live together with the 3 respondent as husband and wife, at any place of their choice.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Premaja Gopinath v. Superintendent Of Police
    (Aug 7, 2015)