THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO WRIT PETITION No.6596 of 2010 ORAL ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader, representing learned Advocate General, appearing for the respondent No.1. 2. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce his wife by name Ayesha Siddiqua @ Jyothsna Shukla before this Court. 3. From the facts narrated in the petition as well as in the nter-affidavit what appears to us is that the alleged detenue left Hyderabad along with her brother and father to angabad on account of the alleged illness of her mother. 4. Therefore, it is the grievance of the petitioner that though elf and the alleged detenue are very much interested in h other and are also married, the alleged detenue was taken y forcibly to Aurangabad by her brother and father and the nts of the alleged detenue were trying to change her mind. 5. These questions cannot be gone into by this Court, h are factual based and sentiment related. 6. At the outset, it has been pointed out that admittedly the ed detenue had left the house with no other persons than own brother and father in order to see her mother’s welfare, h is indicative factor that she had left Hyderabad or the ociation of the petitioner on her own. 7. When this is the complaint of the petitioner, we are not ared to agree with the contention of the learned counsel for petitioner that the alleged detenue was taken away forcibly she was detained at Aurangabad. 8. Prima facie, the action of the alleged detenue in leaving Hyderabad and the association of the petitioner appears to be voluntary and therefore, the aspect of illegal confinement cannot be complained of by the petitioner. 9. At best, it can be termed as the wife’s leaving the ociation of her husband i.e., the petitioner on her own and for own reasons, and in such circumstances, the remedy able to the petitioner is elsewhere, but certainly not by way ng a writ seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus. 10. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in writ petition and the same is, accordingly, disposed of, at the e of admission. However, there shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA _______________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Dated:06th April, 2010 dr