HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY TAKEN UP WRIT PETITION NO.24101 OF 2005 Between: P. Krishnaveni, W/o late Venkataswamy, H.No. 12-6-2/111, Veveknagar, Kukatpally, Hyderabad. …Petitioner AND 1. The Station House Officer, Kukatpally Police Station, Kukatpally, Cyberabad, Hyderabad and three others. ….Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY TAKEN UP WRIT PETITION NO.24101 OF 2005 ORAL ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.VARMA) Heard the learned Government Pleader for Home, representing the learned Advocate General, appearing for the respondents. 2. This writ petition is taken up on the basis of a letter, dated 7.11.2005, addressed to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of Andhra Pradesh, by one P. Krishnaveni, W/o. late Venkataswamy. It is her complaint that her daughter Pavanakumari, aged about 18 years left the house without informing anyone and despite complaint being made to the Station House Officer, Kukatpally Police Station, Kukatpally, Cyberabad, Hyderabad, no action is being initiated. 3. On notice being served, the Inspector of Police, Kukatpally Police Station, Cyberabad, filed a counter-affidavit, inter alia, stating that on a complaint lodged by the petitioner herein, dated 16.2.2005, alleging that her daughter Pavanakumari, aged about 18 years, had left the house and was missing since 5.2.2005, a case in Crime No.144 of 2005 under the head of ‘Girl Missing’ was registered on 16.2.2005 and the investigation revealed that the missing girl left the house and married one Brahmendra Varma on her own volition and they have been leading their marital life happily. 4. In view of the said fact, the petitioner requested the police to drop further course of action in this matter. In order to substantiate this, the statements of the petitioner and the missing girl as well have been recorded. Therefore, we are of the view that the contents of the statement are in correlation with the statements made in the counter-affidavit. 5. In view of the above, we do not find any merit in the Writ Petition and is liable to be closed. 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. No order as to costs. _________________ D.S.R.VARMA, J _______________________ P. SWAROOP REDDY, J Dated: 04.09.2006 KA