HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY Writ Petition No.25570 of 2010 Date: February 9, 2011 Between: M. Srikanth, S/o.late Sri Rama Murthy, aged 31 years, R/o.D.No.33-14-152, Allipuram Main Road, Visakhapatnam … Petitioner And The Director General of Police, Government of A.P., Hyderabad and others … Respondents Order: Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the third respondent, handing over custody of his son to respondents 4 and 5 herein as illegal and arbitrary. Fifth respondent herein is the father-in-law of the petitioner. On a complaint filed by him before the II Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam City on 11-05-2010 alleging that the petitioner herein and his mother harassed his daughter by name Smt.M. Satyavani (wife of the petitioner herein) to bring additional dowry and subjected her to cruelty, a case in Cr.No.233/2010 was registered under Sections 304-B and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 on the file of II Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam. In the aforesaid case, petitioner and his mother were arrested on 11-05-2010 and produced before the learned II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam. It is the grievance of the petitioner that his son, aged about 15 months, is taken by third respondent herein and handed over to respondents 4 and 5, illegally. On obtaining instructions, it is submitted by learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondents-Police that when the petitioner was arrested in connection with the crime in question, there was nobody else to look-after his son, who is aged about 1 ½ years; hence respondents 4 and 5 might have taken custody of the child of the petitioner and respondents- Police have nothing to do with the same. Though petitioner relies on a receipt dated 11-05- 2010 issued by the fifth respondent, it is not clear from the said receipt whether the boy was handed to the fifth respondent, the father-in-law of the petitioner, by the third respondent. If the petitioner claims custody of his son, it is for him to move the appropriate forum, but in view of the denial of the allegation by the respondents-Police that the son of the petitioner is not handed over by them to respondents 4 and 5, no relief as sought can be granted. Writ petition is therefore dismissed, reserving liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum for redressal of his grievance. No order as to costs. ___________________ (R. SUBHASH REDDY, J) February 9, 2011 MRR