IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY Writ Petition No.5542 of 2010 Between: Grace Mercy ..... Petitioner AND 1.Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others. .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr.C.Raghu Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 3: AGP for Home Counsel for Respondent No.4: --- The Court made the following: Order: The limited grievance expressed by the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that respondent No.2- Child Welfare Committee, which handed over the custody of her daughter- Miss Issac Lisi, a minor being 17 years of age, to respondent No.4, has not responded to her representation to hand over the custody of her daughter to herself. I have heard Sri C.Raghu, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home representing respondent Nos.1 to 3. The daughter of the petitioner gave a complaint, which was registered as FIR.No.439 of 2008 by respondent No.3- Station House Officer, Alwal Police Station, under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Evidently, in the said complaint, it was alleged that the complainant’s maternal uncle by name Jutluri Timothy raped her. The said offence was, allegedly, committed in the petitioner’s house and the victim, having obviously lost faith in the petitioner and apprehending further danger to her person, approached the Police for protection. Respondent No.3 initiated proceedings under the A.P.Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2003 (for short ‘the Act’) and the Rules framed thereunder. Respondent No.2- Committee, before which the Victim was produced by the Police, handed over her custody to respondent No.4. The petitioner made a representation, dated 20th February, 2010, before respondent No.2 with a request to hand over her daughter to her. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, I am of the view that it is appropriate that respondent No.2- Committee shall consider the petitioner’s representation and take appropriate decision thereon. While considering the petitioner’s request for handing over the victim’s custody, the Committee shall ascertain the views of the victim and if it is satisfied that handing over of the victim’s custody to the petitioner does not cause harm to the former’s interest, an appropriate order can be passed. On the other hand, if the victim expresses her disinclination to join the petitioner, the Committee shall take appropriate decision in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. It is open for the petitioner to claim alternative relief of visitation right qua the victim. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. As a sequel to disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.7119 of 2010, filed by the petitioner for interim relief, is disposed of as infructuous. ___________________________ (C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J) 10th March, 2010 lur