THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION No.17426 of 2009 Date: 02.09.2009 Between : Tommandru Prashanth Kiumar … Petitioner. And The Superintendent of Police, Medak District at Sangareddy and others. … Respondents. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION No.17426 of 2009 ORAL ORDER : (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader, representing the learned Advocate General, appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2, and also the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3. 2. This Writ of Habeas Corpus is filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to produce Mrs. Thummim Jessica Sindhura @ Sindhura and set her free to choose her choice of residence with her own free will. 3. The averments, in brief, are that the petitioner is working as a Clerk in Christian Indigenous Shalem Gospel Churches, situated at the premises bearing No.3-145, Prashanth Nagar, Siddipet, Medak District, and the third respondent herein is the Founder and General Secretary of the said organization. The petitioner fell in love with the alleged detenu, namely Sindhura, who is the daughter of the third respondent herein, and as a result the parents of the alleged detenu agreed for the marriage of the alleged detenu with the petitioner. Subsequently, it appears that the engagement of the alleged detenu was fixed with one Sri K.Dayasagar Reddy, who is working as a Typist in the office of the Tahsildar, Chinna Koduru, on 25.2.2009. When the petitioner wanted to communicate his feelings about his proposed marriage with the alleged detenu, he was kept at a distance by the parents of the alleged detenu. Therefore, the alleged detenu and the petitioner got married at Arya Samaj, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad, on 4.8.2009. It is further alleged that the parents of the alleged detenu insisted the petitioner and the alleged detenu to convert themselves to Hinduism in order to perform their marriage and accordingly, they got converted into Hinduism and married on 4.8.2009. To that effect, a marriage certificate bearing No.2430/2009, dated 4.8.2009, issued by Arya Samaj, Dhoolpet was also obtained. 4. It is further alleged that the family members of the third respondent, including the third respondent herein, contacted the petitioner through E-mails stating that they accept their relationship and would perform their marriage. Basing on such intimation, the petitioner and the alleged detenu came to the residence of the father of the alleged detenu on 7.8.2009 and upon their return the third respondent confined the petitioner in a room, arranged two goondas and beat him black and blue insisting the petitioner to handover all the original marriage certificates, marriage photos etc. The petitioner was confined for two days and the signatures of the petitioner and also the alleged detenu were obtained on bond papers to the effect that the petitioner took away the alleged detenu in the name of shopping and married her forcibly in Arya Samaj. It is also alleged that the third respondent also grabbed all the original marriage certificate, original certificates of S.S.C., Intermediate, Degree, Passport, cheque book, ration card etc., and warned the petitioner to leave Siddipet for ever. 5. It is also averred that on 10.8.2009, 11.8.2009 and 12.8.2009, the alleged detenu contacted the petitioner to Cell Phone No.96428- 87078 from Cell Phone No.95024-90991 stating that her life is in jeopardy and asked the petitioner to approach any authority or Court of law for her release from the illegal custody of the third respondent. It is also stated that he apprehended danger and likelihood of her being subjected to marry once again with some other person or she may be shifted from India to any other country. Hence, the present writ petition. 6. Counter affidavit is filed by respondent No.2, the Station House Officer, I Town Police Station, Siddipet, Medak District. 7. The third respondent, who is the father of the alleged detenu, also filed counter affidavit denying all the material allegations made in the writ petition. He also stated that the alleged detenu filed a petition O.P.(SR).No.7324 of 2009 before the competent civil Court seeking a decree of nullity of the marriage purported to have been solemnized between the petitioner and herself and also seeking a declaration that the marriage certificate, dated 4.8.2009, as null and void on the ground of fraud as she did not marry the petitioner with free will and her consent was obtained by fraud. 8. Upon the notice issued by this Court, the third respondent is present before this Court today i.e., on 2.9.2009 along with the alleged detenu. On verification, the third respondent stated that the said petition has been filed yesterday i.e., on 1.9.2009. 9. Sri V.Krishna Murthy, counsel representing Sri S.Sharath Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, sought for an adjournment on the ground that Sri Sharath Kumar is not available in the Station. 10. But, since the third respondent as well as the alleged detenu are very much present before this Court today, we do not feel it appropriate to adjourn the matter on account of non-availability of the learned counsel for the petitioner and we also feel it inappropriate to direct the third respondent and the alleged detenu to be present on some other day which is convenient to the learned counsel for the petitioner. Hence, we heard Sri V.Krishna Murthy, who is the counsel on record for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Government Pleader and also the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent. 11. In the process of verification of the truth or otherwise of the allegations made by the petitioner, when the alleged detenu was put all the averments made by the petitioner, she stoutly denied all those averments. Upon being repeatedly questioned by this Court on various issues raised in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the alleged detenu repelled all those allegations. Further, when we specifically put to the alleged detenu about the factum of her marriage with the petitioner, she only stated that in order to avoid the engagement of the alleged detenu with Sri K.Dayasagar Reddy, the petitioner hatched a plan and managed to obtain a false certificate from Arya Samaj. 12. In fact, it is the specific allegation of the alleged detenu that she did not intend to marry the petitioner at any point of time and that she was very keen to have her marriage performed only with the person with whom her engagement was performed. She gave an account of various ancillary circumstances under which she agreed for the fake marriage, which need not be put on record. It is her explicit and categorical statement made in the open Court that she was not at all willing to have any marital relationship with the petitioner and she was very much interested in having her marriage with the person with whom her engagement was performed. She further stated in unequivocal terms that she was residing with her father, who is the third respondent herein, on her own volition and her stay with the third respondent has not been out of any compulsion from any source or from the third respondent, in particular. She also stated that since a sort of marriage certificate had been created, she wanted to have declaration of the said marriage as null and void on the ground of fraud being played by the petitioner. This statement is in line with the averment made by the third respondent in his counter affidavit. 13. The statement made by the alleged detenu is the answer to the questions posed by us to her in the open Court. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the alleged detenu, being a major, has every right and liberty to lead a life of her choice as per her will and wish. 14. Furthermore, so far the petitioner did not even choose to make a complaint to the police when it was his specific case that the alleged detenu and himself were detained illegally by the third respondent and he was beaten black and blue. When the alleged acts of the third respondent amount to an offence under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner is under obligation to make a complaint about the same instead of resorting to approach this Court straight away. 15. Of course, there are no fetters on this Court to interfere in such grave circumstances in which the alleged detenu was allegedly placed in by issuing appropriate writ, particularly a Writ of Habeas Corpus, instead of directing the parties to approach the other Courts or other statutory authorities depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. 16. In the instant case, when the alleged detention was made on 7.8.2009, the writ petition was filed on 20.8.2009. It is to be further remembered that as per the petitioner when the alleged detenu made phone calls on 10th, 11th and 12th August, 2009 to the petitioner to come to her rescue, it is incomprehensible for this Court as to why the petitioner kept quiet for all these days without giving any complaint to the police, particularly when the alleged detenu informed him that her life was in jeopardy. The conduct of the petitioner speaks volumes and this Court cannot appreciate such conduct. 17. In our view, the petitioner made use of this Court as a platform or as a forum to ventilate his unfounded grievance at the cost of the dignity of the alleged detenu and the precious time of the Court. Therefore, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed with exemplary costs. 18. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, at the stage of admission, with costs of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) to be paid to the alleged detenu i.e., Ms.Thummim Jessica Sindhura @ Sindhura. 19. It is made clear that the observations made in this writ petition shall not be understood as the observations made on merits of the case and the same are not binding on the case, which is pending before the competent civil Court in O.P.(SR).No.7324 of 2009. _______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA _________________________ JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO 02-09-2009 Msr THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION No.17426 of 2009 02-09-2009 (Msr)