IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD. THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D. APPA RAO W.P. No. 10398 of 2006 Dated: 13.06.2006 Between:- Chittoju Ramesh s/o Venkateswarlu, aged 32 years, occ: Private Service, R/o. 8- 42/4, Ganeshpuri Colony, Chaitanyapuri road, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. …Petitioner And 1. The Director General of Police, Govt. of A.P. at Saifabad, Hyderabad, 2. The Superintendent of Police, Khammam District at Khammam, 3. The Inspector of Police (SHO), III Town Police, Kothagudem atKothagudem, Khammam District, 4. Smt. Bhagyalaxmi w/o Satyanarayana, aged about 50 years, R/o Quarter No. FB 76, Opp: Bhajana Mandiram, Kothagudem, Khammam District, 5. Ugender s/o not known, C/o Bhagyalaxmi, Quarter No. FB 76, Opp: Bhajana Mandiram, Kothagudem, Khammam District. …Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. CHELAMESWAR AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D. APPA RAO W.P. No. 10398 of 2006 O R D E R (per Hon’ble Sri Justice D. Appa Rao) The petitioner, Chittoju Ramesh, filed this writ petition seeking production of his wife, Smt. Immadi Manjula, on the ground that she was taken away by her parents after their marriage on 29.04.2006 as per Hindu customs and rites. In spite of his telegrams and complaint to the police, they did not restore his wife to him. 2. The 3rd respondent, the Circle Inspector of Police, filed a counter alleging that on enquiry he learnt that the detenue is residing with her parents. At no point of time, the petitioner approached the police and complained against the parents of the alleged detenue that they were harassing her. 3. Today the detenue, Smt. Immadi Manjula, is produced. She is examined in the chambers, in the presence of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Advocate General. Smt. Immadi Manjula while admitting that her marriage took place, however, stated that it was under duress. She further stated that she is not willing to go with the petitioner, and reside with him. She intends to be with her parents. 4. Considering the fact that the alleged detenue is a major, and in view of her statement that she went to her parents on her own accord, we do not see any substance in the petition. 5. In the circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. The petitioner can as well seek appropriate remedy in a competent court, if so advised. _____________________ J. CHELAMESWAR, J _________________ D. APPA RAO,J 13th June, 2006 vp