HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO W.P.No.14475 of 2011 Dated: 20-06-2011 Between: G.Ashok Petitioner AND The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City, Hyderabad and others. Respondents. This Court made the following: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO W.P.No.14475 of 2011 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) Petitioner filed this writ petition for issuance of writ of habeas corpus to direct the respondents to produce his son by name G.Venkatesh, aged about 17 years, who is allegedly confined by respondents 5 and 6 and to set him at liberty. The Station House Officer, Narsingi Police Station-4th respondent herein filed a counter affidavit stating that the alleged detenu along with his wife-G.Lakshmi came to the Police Station and stated that both of them are employees of Ocean Park, Gandipet and for the past one year they are in love with each other and that they went to Kondagattu Anjaneyaswamy Temple of Karimnagar and performed their marriage before the deity on 5.2.2011, and that as their parents are opposing their marriage, they approached the police station. On that, the fourth respondent called for the parents of the alleged detenu i.e. the petitioner and his wife and that they signed a statement written by the wife of alleged detenu in the presence of two witnesses. Today, the alleged detenu is present before this Court along with his wife. Even according to the date of birth certificate issued by the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation, the date of birth of alleged detenu is 27.3.1993 i.e. he crossed the age of 18 years as on 27.3.2011. On examination, the alleged detenu confirmed the factum of his marriage with one G.Lakshmi and stated that he is residing with her separately and he has not been illegally confined by anybody. In view of the statement of the alleged detenu, we see no merit in the allegations made by the petitioner that the alleged detenu has been illegally confined by respondents 5 and 6. Therefore, the question of issuing a writ of habeas corpus does not arise. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J. __________________ JUNE 20, 2011 RAJA ELANGO, J. Tsr.