Kerala High Court Closes Habeas Corpus Petition by Petitioner in Mental Health Detention Matter, Finding No Illegal Confinement. Alleged Detenue Diagnosed with Schizophrenia Properly Cared for in Rehabilitation Centre Admitted by Husband; Police Report Confirmed Proper Care, Leading to Closure of Writ Petition.

Case Note & Summary

The matter was a criminal writ petition filed before the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam seeking a writ of habeas corpus in relation to an elderly woman with a longstanding psychiatric illness. The petitioner was Babu Mohan, aged 64 years. The respondents were the State of Kerala, the District Police Chief, Kannur, the Station House Officer, Thalassery Police Station, Sri Kutty Krishnan aged 88 years, and his son Sri Rahul Krishnan aged 49 years. The alleged detenue was the wife of Kutty Krishnan and mother of Rahul Krishnan. The petition came up for admission on 6 August 2026 before a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M. The petitioner was represented by advocates Priyan P.G. and R. Ravichandran, and the respondents by Special Government Pleader Sreelatha Parameswaran. The alleged detenue married Kuttikrishnan in 1971 and had two sons. Within about two years of the marriage, she started living at her parental home in Palakkad. On realizing that she was suffering from mental illness, her husband consulted doctors, and she underwent treatment and took medication for her psychiatric condition. In 1993, her elder son, Anand Krishnan, who was studying Hotel Management at Manipal in Karnataka, died in a motorcycle accident. Following this tragic incident, the alleged detenue's mental condition deteriorated considerably. She was subsequently examined and treated at a hospital in Manipal, where she was diagnosed with Schizophrenia, a condition with no permanent cure. She continued treatment with prescribed medication. In 2020, the petitioner admitted the alleged detenue to the Schizophrenia Research Foundation Elderly Centre in Chennai, where she underwent treatment and stayed for about one year. The entire expenses for her treatment and stay were met by her husband. Owing to his advanced age, the husband was unable to personally look after his wife and admitted her to the House of Insight Rehabilitation Center, Iritty, Kannur, in April 2026. The respondent informed the petitioner about this arrangement but did not provide the telephone number of the institution because he thought that if the petitioner visited the institution, the alleged detenue might insist on leaving the centre with him, which could create complications. The Director of the Rehabilitation Centre stated that the detenue had been residing at the institution since 20 April 2026, had been undergoing psychiatric treatment for several years, and due to the advanced age of her husband, was admitted to the centre where she was properly looked after. The Director also referred to the admission agreement executed with the institution, which obliged the institution to interact only with the husband of the detenue and not with anyone else. The legal issue before the court was whether the alleged detenue was under illegal detention warranting a writ of habeas corpus. The petitioner argued through counsel for production of the alleged detenue. The Special Government Pleader placed the police report before the court. The court heard both sides and took the report filed by the Station House Officer, Thalassery, on record. On perusal of the report and the Director's statement, the court found no illegal confinement and concluded that the detenue was properly cared for. Accordingly, in view of the aforesaid, the petition was closed.

Headnote

Issue of Consideration

Final Decision

The petition was closed in view of the report filed by the Station House Officer, Thalassery, which was taken on record, and the statement of the Director of the Rehabilitation Centre that the detenue was properly looked after and had been residing there since 20 April 2026.

Law Points