THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY WRIT PETITION No.25752 of 2009 ORAL ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma) Heard both sides. This writ petition is filed by the husband seeking to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to produce his wife, Pilla Kondamma @ Chinni, who is the alleged detenue, before this Court. It appears that there is a controversy with regard to the age of the alleged detenue by name Pilla Kondamma @ Chinni, Daughter of Pilla Adinarayana. It is the contention of the petitioner that the girl is a major and their marriage was performed as per the Hindu rites. On the other hand, it is contention of the learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 that the said girl was a minor as on the date of the alleged marriage with the writ petitioner. However, at present, it is not in dispute that the girl is in the custody of her parents, who are respondents 1 and 2. Counter-affidavit is filed by respondents 1 and 2, who are no other than the parents of the alleged detenue, in which it has been brought to the notice of this Court that on 17.11.2009, the writ petitioner filed O.P.No.729 of 2009 before the Family Court, Vijayawada, seeking the relief of restitution of conjugal rights. It has been further stated that their daughter i.e., the alleged detenue is attending the Court regularly in the said O.P. Here, it is noticed by this Court that filing of the said O.P. at Vijayawada by the writ petitioner is earlier to the filing of this writ petition. What is to be noticed is that the writ petitioner had full knowledge that O.P. seeking the relief of restitution of conjugal rights had already been filed before the appropriate Court, and having done so, he resorted to file this writ petition. This is a deliberate mischief played by the writ petitioner not on the learned counsel appearing on his behalf before this rt by not informing the factual position but also with this rt. In other words, this is, in our considered view, a deliberate mpt by the writ petitioner to make use of this Court as a orm to achieve the intended result, which is to be deprecated y. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances, ee no merits in this writ petition and the same is liable to be issed with costs. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed with exemplary costs of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) to be paid by the writ petitioner to the first respondent, in whose custody the alleged detenue is at present, within a period of four weeks from today. ________________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA __________________________ JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Dated:15th February, 2010 dr