IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY WRIT PETITION No: 25938 of 2008 BETWEEN: Thatha Subba Rao @ Shiva S/o. Koteswar Rao, R/o. H.No.8-2- 293/82/A/523, Road No.27, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad. ... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent of Police, Nellore, Nellore District. 2 The Station House Officer, II Town Police Station, Kavali, Nellore District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly on in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents herein to produce the detenu viz., Thatha Vishnu Vardhan, S/o. T. Ramachandra Rao, aged 6 years, who was picked up by the constables belonging to the 2nd respondent police station by following the minor boy from Little Star High School, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad where he is studying, before this Hon'ble Court and to handover the minor boy to the petitioner herein, and to pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.A.V.V.S.N.MURTHY Counsel for the Respondents: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following: ORDER: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V. Eswaraiah) The petitioner, paternal uncle of the minor child, alleged detenu i.e. Thatha Vishnu Vardhan, aged about 6 years, filed this writ petition seeking a Writ of Habeas Corpus to direct the respondents to produce the alleged detenu, who is said to have been picked up the constables belonging to II Town Police Station, Kavali, Nellore District, on 22.11.2008. 2. The petitioner submits that the alleged detenu is the son of his deceased brother, T. Ramchandra Rao, who expired on 21.09.2006. He further submits that on coming to know about the alleged detenu being taken away, he went to the second respondent police station on 23.11.2008 and enquired about the minor boy but the second respondent refused to give any response. 3. Pursuant to the notice ordered by this Court on 27.11.2008, the second respondent filed a counter stating that on 22.06.2008 the mother of alleged detenu along with her parents came to the police station and lodged a complaint stating that she was married to T. Ramchandra Rao six years ago and that her husband died on 21.09.2006. Two months after the death of her husband, her mother-in-law, father-in-law and brother-in-law necked her out of the house and due to unbearable torture by her in-laws she came to Kavali and was staying with her parents. While so, on 20.09.2007 her parents-in-law had come to Kavali and had taken her son – alleged detenu, along with them to Gammallapalem Village of Prakasam District for attending her husband’s death anniversary and after the said ceremony she was necked out of the house and her son was detained by them illegally. Based on the said complaint, the police registered a case in Cr.No.47 of 2008 under Sections 498-A, 363, 368, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the investigation was taken up. 4. During the course of the investigation the accused Nos.2 and 4 were arrested and later accused Nos.1 and 3 surrendered before the Honourable Additional Judicial First Class, Magistrate, Kavali on 07.07.2008. It is stated that the petitioner herein is A-3 in the said crime and he surrendered before the Court. On the information given by the mother, the alleged detenu was traced out at Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad. The alleged detenu and his mother were brought back to the police station, Kavali and was produced before the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kavali on 24.11.2008 and the said detenu was handed over to the custody of the mother. 5. As the boy since recovered and handed over to the custody of his mother through the process of Court, it is not open to the petitioner to contend that somebody else illegally detained the alleged detenu. As a matter of fact, for the criminal action on the part of the petitioner and the parents-in-law of the detenu’s mother, the criminal prosecution is launched and investigation is taken up. In view of the same, the writ petition is devoid of merits. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J __________________ G. V. SEETHAPATHY, J December 4, 2008 DSK