THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.10834 of 2009 Date: 16.09.2009 Between : Syed Abdul Aziz … Petitioner And The Government of A.P., Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.10834 of 2009 ORAL ORDER : (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader, representing the learned Advocate General, appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4. 2. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that he, being the natural father of the child viz., Syeda Ameena Fathima, aged about 15 months, has been denied the association of the said child. It is the allegation of the petitioner that because of the estrangement between the spouses the child has been in the custody of the 5th respondent, being the natural mother of the child and consequent upon the estrangement, the natural mother appears to have kept the child in the custody of her sister i.e., respondent No.8 at Hyderabad and left for foreign country on account of personal reasons, which are not worth mentioning. 3. Notices have been served on respondent Nos.5 to 8. None appeared for respondent Nos.5 to 8 and no counter has been filed on their behalf. Therefore, it is obvious that the child has been in the custody of respondent No.8. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks an undertaking from respondent No.8 to the effect that the custody of the child will not be given to anybody. 5. In this connection, before insisting upon such an undertaking from respondent No.8, it is to be seen that no case is made out by the petitioner in order to make such a request and this Court cannot direct respondent No.8 to give an undertaking as sought for by the petitioner. Obviously, the petitioner has other ways to have the custody of the child and the Writ of Habeas Corpus is not the only remedy available to the petitioner. 6. Therefore, having regard to the fact that the petitioner has other remedies available, suffice to close the writ petition with a liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedies elsewhere as permissible under law. 7. Subject to above observations, the writ petition is closed, at the stage of admission. There shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA __________________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR 16-09-2009 Msr. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.10834 of 2009 16-09-2009 (Msr)