IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH: HYDERABAD Dt.13-09-2010 PRESENT: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO WRIT PETITION No.21684 OF 2010 BETWEEN: Chuttugulla Chitti Babu S/o. Ch. Laxana Swamy …. Petitioner AND The Government of A.P., Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Hyderabad and others …. Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO WRIT PETITION No.21684 OF 2010 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) By filing this Writ Petition, the petitioner seeks a direction from this Court for production of Smt. T. Sirisha, alleged detenue, alleging that she was illegally confined by her parents and to set her liberty forthwith. 2. Petitioner is a native of Elamanchili Village and is working as Chef at Vijayawada. While so, petitioner fell in love with one T. Sirisha daughter of his cousin (5th respondent) and both of them decided to marry. On 13-07-2010 both the petitioner and the detenue got married at Bethesta Church, Y.S.R. Nagar, Narasapur Town in the presence of some of the elders of the petitioner and also the Church elders. Apprehending danger from the family members of the detenue, they approached the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Narasapur and made oral complaint. Then, the Deputy Superintendent of Police called the 4th respondent –Station House Officer, Elamanchili Police Station, over telephone and told that if any complaint received from the parents of the detenue, the same may be settled through reconciliation and to give protection to the petitioner and the detenue. Thereafter, they approached the 4th respondent and the 4th respondent enquired about the relationship between the petitioner and the detenue and asked the detenue regarding her consent to the marriage. She replied that no one forced her to the marriage and she herself willingly married the petitioner. Thereafter, the 4th respondent called the 5th respondent and the 5th respondent along with some other persons came to the Police Station and asked the detenue to come alongwith them. But, the detenue refused to go with them and stated that her marriage was already solemnized with the petitioner and that she wants to stay with the petitioner. Then, the 4th respondent scolded the detenue and asked her to go with her mother, stating that he is not recognizing the marriage and also warned the parents of the petitioner to convince the detenue to go along with her mother otherwise, he will foist a case against them and the petitioner. Without any option, the detenue agreed to accompany with the 5th respondent for one day only. Accordingly, the 5th respondent took the detenue alongwith her, with the help of the 4th respondent. The 4th respondent detained the petitioner in the police station illegally till 16-07-2010 and on 16-07-2010, the detenue was not produced in the police station and she was confined by her mother illegally. A case in Crime No.73 of 2007 was registered against the petitioner for the offence under Section 366-A IPC and the petitioner was released on conditional bail on 04-08-2010. Hence, the petitioner filed this Writ Petition for issuance of Habeas Corpus. 3. Counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent shows that on the complaint lodged by the 5th respondent with the Police, Elamanchili on 12-07-2010 stating that her daughter Sirisha is missing since 10-07- 2010, suspecting involvement of the petitioner, a case in Crime No.73 of 2010 has been registered against the petitioner for the offence under Section 366-A IPC and investigation is taken up. It is further contended that during the course of investigation on 16-07-2010, the detenue and the suspect approached the Police of Elamanchili and on examination, the detenue stated that she was taken away by the petitioner against her will and she was made to move Guntur, Vijaywawada and Narasapuram and that after recording the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the detenue, he arrested the petitioner on 16-07-2010 and produced him before the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Narasapuram on the same day and after completion of investigation, he filed the charge sheet before the learned Magistrate. 4. The contents in the counter-affidavit shows that the alleged detenue stated that she was not willing to go with the petitioner. To ascertain the same, this Court directed to produce the alleged detenue. Pursuant to said directions, the alleged detenue is present and on examination, she stated that she is a major and her date of birth is 07-06-1992, which fact has not been disputed by the petitioner. When enquired with the detenue regarding illegal confinement, she stated that she has not been confined by her mother, respondent No.5, and that she is staying with her mother on her own accord. 5. In view of the statement made by the alleged detenue, the question of illegal confinement does not arise. Being major, the girl can reside on her own accord. 6. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ A. GOPAL REDDY, J September 13, 2010 ______________ RAJA ELANGO, J KTL