THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO WRIT PETITION No.21779 of 2010 Dated : 27.09.2010 Between : Y.Bharath … Petitioner a n d The Commissioner of Police & others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO WRIT PETITION No.21779 of 2010 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) By means of filing this Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus for production of Ms.Haritha Spandana before this Court. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is stated by the petitioner that he and the detenue fell in love with each other while they were studying in the same college and when he approached the parents of the detenue with a proposal to marry the detenue, they refused for the same and therefore he and the detenue got married against the wishes of her parents, on 20.02.2009 at Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, Koti, Hyderabad. It is further stated that, since the return of parental uncle of the detenue from USA, harassment was started and he dragged away the detenue from his company on 15.08.2010 and from that day onwards she has been in illegal confinement of her parents and other relatives. The petitioner filed copy of the marriage certificate dated 20.02.2009 issued by the President, Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, evidencing their marriage at Arya Samaj. Petitioner also states to have lodged a complaint before the Human Rights Commission on 17.08.2010 and on such complaint, the Human Rights Commission on 17.08.2010 directed the Commissioner of Police to produce the detenue on 23.08.2010, but she was not so produced. Therefore, the petitioner apprehends that the third respondent, who is the father of detenue, may shift her from Hyderabad and get her remarried against her will. Second respondent filed a counter affidavit admitting that petitioner lodged complaint on 16.08.2010 against the third respondent and one Bharath Kumar, the paternal uncle of the detenue. He stated that, basing on such complaint, a G.D. entry has been made on the same day and during the course of enquiry, the father of the petitioner was examined and his statement corroborated the contents of the complaint. The statements of the petitioner and his father were recorded, which disclose about the factum of marriage of the petitioner with detenue. He further submitted that efforts are going on to trace out the detenue. The third respondent also filed a counter affidavit denying the harassment and illegal confinement of the detenue. It is further stated that in October, 2008, the detenue in search of job participated in a job mela in Hyderabad and there she met the writ petitioner, who was her classmate in college. The Writ petitioner made a marriage proposal to his daughter and she in turn informed the same to him and his wife. They did not agree to the said proposal and they went to the house of the writ petitioner and spoke to his parents, explained to them that they are not inclined to give their daughter in marriage to the petitioner and requested them to prevail over their son, the writ petitioner, from interfering with the life of the detenue. Thereafter, the petitioner started threatening the detenue that he will call the TV channels and throw all her family members on the road. As per the directions of this Court, the detenue was produced before this Court on 14.09.2010, by her parents. She was examined in chambers nearly for an hour and later in the presence of the writ petitioner and her parents. The detenue though admitted her marriage with the writ petitioner, stated that immediately after the marriage she left his company and is staying with her parents and asked him to convince her parents and until they are convinced to send her with him, she is not prepared to leave her parents and in spite of such request made to the petitioner, he has not made any efforts to come along with his parents to her parents house so as to convince her parents. She also stated that she is not illegally confined by her parents, but she is residing along with them expecting the writ petitioner to take all possible steps to convince her parents. She sought time to decide the matter and at the request of the parties, the matter is posted to today. Today also both the parties are present and the detenue stated that there is no change in her stand that she is not illegally detained by her parents, she is the only daughter to her parents and unless the petitioner is able to convince her parents that he will look after her welfare, she is not prepared to leave her parents. In view of the stand taken by the detenue that she has not been illegally confined by her parents and expecting the petitioner to be bold and courageous, she is staying with her parents and she cannot leave her parents house and also keeping in view the fact that the alleged detenue is a major and residing at her parents house, this Court is satisfied that she has not been illegally detained by her parents. As such, issuance of writ of Habeas Corpus as sought by the petitioner does not arise. The Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed without costs. The parties are at liberty to avail their remedies before appropriate authorities. Both the parties are at liberty to place the copy of this Order before the Human Rights Commission, so that it will not insist the presence of the alleged detenue before it to close the case. _____________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J ___________________ RAJA ELANGO, J 27th September, 2010 sur