THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY W.P.No.17110 of 2011 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice V. Eswaraiah) This writ of Habeas Corpus is filed seeking to give a direction to the respondents to produce the alleged detenu viz., K.Vanitha Reddy, D/o.K.Raja Reddy, on the ground that she is illegally detained without registering any crime and without producing her before concerned Magistrate Court. The petitioner is the father of the alleged detenu, who is said to have been kidnapped by the 3rd respondent with the help of the 4th respondent. It is stated that his daughter K.Vanitha Reddy completed her degree and was taking private tuitions. While so, on 26-02-2011, the alleged detenu informed that she is going to Srikalahasthi Temple along with her friends and left the house at 8.30 a.m. but she did not return back and, therefore, he lodged a report before the 2nd respondent by giving cell number of his daughter. Accordingly, a case was registered under the head “Girl Missing”. Pursuant to the said report, police commenced investigation and they found that the cell phone of the alleged detenu was switched off and they also enquired with their neighbours, who are said to have stated that love affair was going on between the alleged detenu and the 3rd respondent and in fact, the alleged detenu telephoned going to telephone booths from various places and the mother of the alleged detenu also stated that she received phone calls from her daughter that she married the 3rd respondent with her own will and volition and not to make any efforts to trace her. It is stated that during the course of the investigation of the case, the 4th respondent, who is the maternal uncle of the 3rd respondent, was also examined, but the allegations levelled against him are not established. The 4th respondent filed a counter in which it is stated that he was hospitalised during the relevant period from 17-11-2010 to 24-04-2011 and merely because he happens to be the uncle of the 3rd respondent, it cannot be said that he had instigated the 3rd respondent to elope the alleged detenu and marry the alleged detenu. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly submitted that if the alleged detenu voluntarily married the 3rd respondent the petitioner could make every attempt to settle the issue amicably and peacefully. Whether the alleged detenu is safe, whether her marriage with the 3rd respondent is performed with her own volition are all matters to be enquired into by recording her statement by the Magistrate concerned. Therefore, we direct the 1st respondent-Superintendent of Police to monitor the enquiry and see that the alleged detenu is produced before the Magistrate concerned preferably within two months, so as to enable the learned Magistrate to record her statement and take appropriate action in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is accordingly closed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J ____________________________ G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY, J Date : 12-09-2011 Prv