THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Writ Petition No.211 of 2010 Date: 30-3-2010 Between Kamadi Sarojini … Petitioner and Govt. of A.P., Rep. by its Secretary, Dept. of Home, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 3 others … Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Writ Petition No.211 of 2010 Oral Order: (per D.S.R.Varma, J.) Heard Sri M.C.Acharyulu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader representing the learned Advocate General for respondents 1 to 3. 2. This writ petition is filed seeking to issue a writ of habeas corpus directing the respondents to produce the petitioner’s minor daughter, namely, K.Durga, aged about 16 years, before this Court and consequently release her from the clutches of respondent No.4. 3. It is the contention of the petitioner that the alleged detenue, who is no other than her daughter, was illegally taken away by respondent No.4 and that she is a minor as per records. 4. But, upon being questioned before this court by us the girl informed us that she is a major and aged about 19 years. 5. We are not in a position to assess the exact age or the truth or otherwise of the statements of the either side as regards the age of the alleged detenue. 6. It is the further assertion of the alleged detenue that she was married to respondent No.4. So also it is the contention of respondent No.4. But no proof whatsoever had been pressed into service. 7. But, the peculiar fact is that the original wife of respondent No.4 is also present before this court. She also says that she also is not in a position to control respondent No.4 and the alleged detenue from their meeting each other. She also had no objection if the alleged detenue is in the association of respondent No.4, who is her husband. 8. In spite of these factual things, we are unable to arrive at any conclusion as regards the age of the alleged detenue, but on examination we could assess that she had attained the absolute age of discretion and has all the wisdom that is expected to be possessed by a prudent lady at that age. 9. In similar circumstances, a Division Bench of this court in Makemalla Sailoo v. Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda[1] also permitted the boy and the girl to live together having regard to the various other provisions of other enactments. In fact, following the said judgment, this court also had rendered a good number of decisions. 10. Hence, having regard to the facts and circumstances, the alleged detenue is set at liberty and she is permitted to take a decision of her own as suits her. 11. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of, at the stage of admission. ___________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA ___________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 30th March, 2010. Ak THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Writ Petition No.211 of 2010 (Order of the Division Bench delivered by DSRV, J.) 30th March, 2010. [1] 2006 (2) ALD 290 (DB)