IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 3045 of 2009 Between: R.S.L.N. Somayajulu S/o. Late Suryanarayana Murthy R/o. H.No. 10-6-99/1/1 Road No. 5, Brunda Van Colony, Saroornagar, R.R. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Director General of Police Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 2 The Commissionr of Police, Cyberabad, at Gachibowli 3 The Station House Officer, P.S. Saroornagar Cyberabad Commissionerate at Dilsuknagar, R.R. District. 4 The Superintendent of Police, Krishna District at Machilipatnam, Krishna District. 5 The Station House Officer, Police Station Kuchipudi, at Kuchipudi, Krishna District. 6 Smt. R. Bala Thripura Sundari W/o. Srinivas R/o. 10-6-86, Plot NO. 38, Road No. 38, Brundavan Colony Saroornagar , Presently R/o. her parents House C/o. D/o. Y.V.R. Subrahmanya Sharma , Occ: Sanskrith Pandith Z.P. High School, Kuchipudi, Krishna District. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an appropriate writ order or dircection more particularly one in the nature of writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents to produce petitioner's son by name Srinivas S/o. R.S.L.N. Somayajulu, aged 28 yrs, and pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.G.LNARASIMHA RAO & ASSOCIATES Counsel for the Respondent No.: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following : HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 3045 OF 2009 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy) One R.S.L.N.Somayajulu filed this writ of habeas corpus seeking direction to the respondents for production of his son by name Srinivas before this Court and to set him at liberty. As per the averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the son of the petitioner married Smt. R.Bala Thripura Sundari-6th respondent herein on 3.7.2002 at Kovvuru while she was working at Mahaboobabad and then, his son shifted his residence from Kovvuru to Mahaboobabad. During the course of employment, both the couple shifted their residence to Hyderabad and residing at Kothapet surroundings. The couple blessed with a child and as both of them are employees, the petitioner shifted to Hyderabad along with his wife to see the welfare of the child. Due to the domestic disputes, the 6th respondent lodged a complaint with Saroornagar Police Station against the petitioner and due the said disputes, the petitioner shifted his residence to his native place. But some days later, again, on the request of the couple, the petitioner shifted to Hyderabad and residing separately. While so, on 13.10.2008, the 6th respondent informed the petitioner at 9.00 p.m. that his son did not reach the house. On that, the petitioner tried to contact his missing son through cell-phone but as there was no response and after searching here and there, he lodged a complaint with the Saroornagar Police on which basis a case in Crime No.1330 of 2008 was registered on 1.11.2008 but till now, there is no progress in the investigation. On the other hand, the police of Kuchipudi came to the petitioner on 24.12.2008 saying that a complaint is registered against him and his family members on the complaint lodged by 6th respondent. On that, himself and his family members went to Kuchipudi Police Station on 28.12.2008 where he was directed to compromise the matter with the 6th respondent by paying some amounts to her. 3rd and 5th respondents filed separate counter affidavits stating that on the complaint lodged by the petitioner, police visited Gurunanak Engineering College, Ibrahimpatnam, R.R.District where the son of the petitioner was working as Lab Assistant to verify whether he is attending the college or not and it came to light that since 14.10.2008 he has not been attending the college and no useful information could be gathered. The investigation revealed that because of internal disputes and quarrels between the missing person and his wife-6th respondent, he left the house. The 6th respondent in her counter affidavit stated that she is apprehending that the petitioner might have kidnapped her husband with the object of separating her from her husband and getting him married again. Therefore, she was constrained to approach the Station House Officer of Kuchipudi Police Station, Krishna District by a petition dated 20.12.2008 for taking necessary action against the petitioner and his family members. The police of Kuchipudi called the petitioner and his family members to the police station on 28.12.2008 and the petitioner assured the police that the matter will be settled and to that effect he also gave an undertaking in writing to the police. Considering the facts of the case, the above writ petition appears to have been filed only to get rid of the 6th respondent. In the reply affidavit filed by the petitioner, he has not denied the fact of his giving an undertaking in writing before the Station House Officer, Kuchipudi Police Station, Krishna District assuring that he would settle the matter with the 6th respondent. In view of the same, the present writ petition filed by the petitioner is nothing but an abuse of process of law to force the 6th respondent to agree for his terms and see that she will not prosecute her remedies. The writ petition lacks bona fides and the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. The 3rd respondent is directed to complete the investigation into the crime registered on the basis of complaint lodged by the petitioner and file a report before the jurisdictional magistrate with due intimation to the petitioner. No order as to costs. _________________ (A. GOPAL REDDY, J.) _______________ (K.C. BHANU, J.) MARCH 23, 2009 TSR