IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 1803 of 2008 Between: B. Veera Narayana, S/o. Peda Veeraiah, R/o. H.No. 2-2-83/13/1, Nayeem Nagar, Hanamkonda, Warangal District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent of Police, Khammam District, Khammam. 2 The Station House Officer, II Town Police Station, Khammam. 3 Soma Venkta Subbaiah, S/o.Not Known, R/o. H.No. 10-5-45/1, Mamindla Gudem, Opp: to Dr. Papalal Hospital, Khammam. 4 K. Bhaskara Rao, S/o.Not Known, R/o. H.No. 7-3-67, Gattaiah Centre, Dwaraka Nagar, Khammam. .....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, order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce the son of the Petitioner i.e., B. Srikanth before this Hon'ble Court and order for release him from the custody of the respondents 3 and 4 and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.SUBBA RAO KORRAPATI Counsel for the Respondent No.: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy) The petitioner, who is the father of the alleged detenu viz., B. Srikanth, invoked the Writ of Habeas Corpus jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for release of his son alleging that while his son was studying B.Tech at Khammam fell into love with S. Subhashini, the daughter of the third respondent herein, and they got married at Aryasamaj Office at Kothi without their knowledge. On coming to know about their marriage, the petitioner along with his younger son went to Khammam on 13.01.2008 to meet the third and fourth respondents, but he could not find his son in the house of the third and fourth respondents, and hence, he is apprehending that third and fourth respondents might have confined his son for extraneous consideration. Therefore, he seeks a direction to the first and second respondents to produce his son and to set him at liberty forthwith. In response to the notice, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Khammam II Town Police station, the second respondent herein filed counter affidavit stating that neither the petitioner nor the unofficial respondents lodged any complaint with their Police Station. On receipt of notice, the second respondent police made enquires, which reveal that the wife of the alleged detenu, namely, Subhashini, lodged a complaint dated 6.02.2008, on 7.02.2008 with the Station House Officer, Sanathnagar Police Station, Cyberabad, stating that she studied in a college where the alleged detenu was studying and fell in love with each other. As the parents of the alleged detenu have not agreed to their marriage they married at Aryasamaj, Kothi and started living at H.No.5-103/1, near Vegetable Market, Bharatnagar, Hyderabad. On completion of studies both of them secured jobs in Satyam BPO. While so, in the last week of December, 2007 the in-laws of the complainant came to their house and started harassing her and took away the alleged detenu to Hanamkonda, Warangal District. Again the alleged detenu came and joined her. On 7.01.2008 her in-laws again came to Hyderabad and took away the alleged detenu along with his belongings including the Marriage Certificates, Marriage Photos etc. On the basis of the said complaint, a case in Crime No.43 of 2008 was registered for the offence under Section 498-A IPC of Sanathnagar Police Station and the investigation is under progress. On the other hand, the third and fourth respondents filed counter affidavit stating that the petitioner himself confined the alleged detenu and lodged the above complaint to cause mental and physical harassment to his daughter. The alleged detenu, his wife-Subhashini, the third respondent and the petitioner present in the Court. Both the alleged detenu and his wife, in the presence of police, stated that the matter has been amicably settled between them and neither the petitioner nor the third respondent will interfere with their marital life and allow them to live on their own. The same is accordingly recorded. Since the alleged detenu has not illegally confined by the R.3 and R.4 as alleged by the petitioner, no further adjudication is called for. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. ___________________ (A.GOPAL REDDY, J) _____________ (K.C. BHANU , J) 19th March, 2008 Js. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Superintendent of Police, Khammam District, Khammam. 2 The Station House Officer, II Town Police Station, Khammam. 3 2 CCs to the Advocate General, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad(OUT) 4 2 CD copies. Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MJ}