HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 1402 OF 2011 Monday, the Twenty Eighth day of February, Two Thousand and Eleven Between S.Ramanjana Reddy Petitioner AND The Station House Officer, Begumpet (WPS) Begumpet, Hyderabad and others Respondents THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) The petitioner, who is husband of the alleged detenu namely Asha @ Ashadevi, filed this writ of habeas corpus for her production before this court, alleging that their marriage was performed on 11.6.1997 at Tirumala and both of them lived at the residence of the petitioner at Hindupur, Anantapur district happily for one year and thereafter differences arose between them and she left the matrimonial house in the year 1998. In the year 2003, she lodged complaint before Begumpet Police Station, who registered a case in Cr. No.88 of 2003 for the offence under Sec.498-A and 494 IPC and Sec. 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and the Police, Begumpet, after investigation filed charge sheet, which was registered as CC No. 330 of 2005, on the file of the learned XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad and the said case is pending for trial. It is stated that she also filed a maintenance case in MC No. 57 of 2003 against the petitioner, which is also pending on the file of the Family Court, Secunderabad. On the representation of the petitioner that the alleged detenu is under the influence of the respondents 2 and 3 and they are not allowing him to meet her and, therefore, he apprehends that she is in illegal custody of her parents, this court with a view to verify the truth or otherwise of the said representation, directed the police to produce her. Accordingly, she is produced before this court today and we have examined her. She stated that as the petitioner has already married another woman, she filed complaint against him for the offences under Sec.498-A and 494 IPC and Sec. 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and since he is not maintaining her, she also filed a maintenance case. As such, she stated that she is not under the influence of anybody and she is living on her own accord without the force of anybody. Therefore, we are of the view that filing of the writ of habeas corpus is absolutely an abuse of process of law. Consequently, the writ petition, being devoid of merits, is dismissed with costs quantified at Rs.5,000/- payable to the A.P. State Legal Services Authority, Hyderabad. ___________________ Justice V.Eswaraiah ________________________ Justice V.Suri Appa Rao February 28, 2011 MAS