IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL 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 : 28286 of 2008 Between: Uppala Vijaya Lakshmi W/o. Uppala Venkata Ramana R/o. Plot No.113, House No.6-264, Indra Singh Nagar Colony, Chintal, R.R. District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Deputy Inspector General of Police Eluru West Godavari, A.P. 2 The Superintendent of Police Krishna District, Machilipatnam. 3 The Inspector of Police P.S. Nagaya Lanka, Krishna District. 4 Smt. Uppala Prameela W/o. Late Uppala Babu Rao 4th Ward, H.No.4-8, Nagayalanka Post & Village, Krishna District. 5 Uppala Leela Krishna Prasad S/o. Late Uppala Babu Rao Main Road, Nagayalanka Post & Village, Krishna District. 6 Uppala Sridevi W/o. Krishna Babu, R/o. Jaggaiahpet Village & Post, Krishna District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 issue an appropriate writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents police to produce the detenu namely Uppala Venkata Ramana, S/o. late Uppala Babu Rao, Age:29 years, before the Hon'ble Court, in the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: MRA.SAMIR KUMAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following : ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy) The petitioner filed this Writ of Habeas Corpus to direct the respondents 1 to 3 for production of the alleged detenu, namely, Uppala Venkataramana before this Court. The petitioner and the alleged detenu are present in the Court. When examined, the alleged detenu, who is the husband of the petitioner, stated that he has not been illegally confined by anybody including respondents 4 to 7 as alleged in the writ petition, and he is not willing to join the company of the petitioner. Since, the alleged detenu is a major, whether he is willing to join the company of the petitioner or not is purely a family dispute between him and the petitioner. The Writ of Habeas Corpus jurisdiction will not attract since the alleged detenu is not illegally confined by anybody. The petitioner is at liberty to avail the remedies by approaching the family Court. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. ___________________ (A.GOPAL REDDY, J.) _____________ (K.C. BHANU, J.) 30th April, 2009 Js.