Dismissed

Matta Rakesh v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC3 Sept 2021WP/14481/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition seeking habeas corpus to direct respondents to produce his wife from alleged illegal detention by her parents. The High Court relied on the wife's 164 Cr.P.C. statement where she claimed to have voluntarily returned home with her mother, thereby refusing the prayer and dismissing the petition.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for production of the wife under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and Article 226 refused. Petition dismissed with no costs.

Matta Rakesh Vs the State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH : AMARAVATI

¶2

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶3

¶4

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶5

WRIT PETITION No. 14481 of 2021

¶6

(Taken up through video conferencing)

¶7

Matta Rakesh S/o. Prabhakara Rao, Aged about 22 years, Hindu, r/o. D.No.11-141, Penamaluru village and Mandal, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh State. .. Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, A.P. Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Thulluru Mandalam, Amaravathi, Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh State and others.

¶10

.. Respondents

¶11

Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. Devadass Balantha

¶12

Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Mr. Y.N.Vivekananda, Government Pleader

¶13

Counsel for respondent No.4 : --

¶14

ORAL ORDER

¶15

Dt: 03.09.2021

¶16

(per Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ)

¶17

Heard Mr. Devadass Balantha, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶18

Also heard Mr. Y.N.Vivekananda, learned Government Pleader

¶19

attached to the office of learned Additional Advocate General-II appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶20

By this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking a writ in the nature of habeas corpus to direct the respondent Nos.3 and 4 to produce his wife “Ms. Suravarapu Sushmitha” from the illegal detention of respondent No.4.

¶21

¶22

The case of the petitioner is that he and Ms. Suravarapu Sushmitha had fallen in love with each other and, accordingly, he married Ms. Suravarapu Sushmitha in Joseph Thambi Church, China Avutupally, Krishna District on 22.02.2021. The petitioner is studying B.Com. in SRR and CVR College, Vijayawada and he belongs to S.C-Madiga community. Ms. Suravarapu Sushmitha is studying B.Tech in Srivani College, Mylavaram, Krishna District and she belongs to Kapu caste. The parents and relatives of Ms. Suravarapu Sushmitha did not accept the marriage and, accordingly, the petitioner and his wife had approached the Station House Officer, Penamaluru Police Station for security and the respondent No.3 counselled the parents of both sides not to interfere with their marital life. It is the further case of the petitioner that on 06.07.2021, taking advantage of he not being at home, the mother of Ms. Suravarapu Sushmitha, viz., Lalitha, came to his residence along with her husband/respondent No.4 and 15 members of relatives and forcefully took away his wife.

¶23

The statement of Ms. Suravarapu Sushmitha was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and by a Memo, Mr. Y.N.Vivekananda has brought the same on record. A copy of the same was furnished to Mr. Devadass Balantha. In the 164 Cr.P.C. statement, Ms. Suravarapu Sushmitha stated as follows:

¶24

“My family has been residing in New Harijanawada, Penamaluru Village & Mandal for the last Seven years. My father and mother namely Sri Venkateswara Rao and Smt.Suravarapu Lalitha have been working in M/s.Kranthi Transport, Auto Nagar, Vijayawada as workers. I have an elder sister namely Priyanka, who is working as an Assistant

¶25

¶26

Manager in Kotak Bank, Vijayawada. I am studying 3^rd year B.Tech in Srivani Social Education, Mylavaram, Krishna District.

¶27

One Rakesh, who resides nearby my house in Penamaluru used to stalk me in the morning and evening while going to college and returning home and used to threaten me to marry him, else he would kill me and my family members. And he also used to threaten me that he would spoil my sister’s life. As my parents are suffering with ill-health, I could not bring the same to their notice and having no other go, I had to marry Rakesh. I also did not bring the same to the notice of Penamaluru police as I got scared that he would attack my family and harm them.

¶28

On 22.02.2021 in the afternoon hours, Rakesh came to my house when I was alone, forcibly took me out of the house and married me in Avutapalli Church at about 06.00 or 06.30 p.m. on that day and two persons came along with Rakesh to the Church and I do not know their names. Soon after the marriage, Rakesh used to take me to his relatives houses situated at different places. Rakesh did not give me cell phone in order to prevent me to communicate with my parents. Rakesh used to harass me physically and mentally during his company besides beating me black and blue.

¶29

On 01^st or 3^rd of July, 2021, Rakesh and I came to his house in Penamaluru. On knowing the same, my mother came to Rakesh’s house on 6^th July, 2021 to request me to get my thumb impression for my college scholarship. At that

¶30

¶31

time Rakesh was not at home and only his grandmother was present. Then, I told my mother about the harassment being made by Rakesh and I expressed that unable to bear the harassment. On that, I voluntarily went along with my mother to my house. Nobody has kidnapped me.

¶32

On 07^th July, 2021, I called Circle Inspector, Penamaluru over phone and narrated the same by saying that I am suffering from ill-health and will come to police station personally and to give my statement. My parents took me to Hyderabad and kept me in my relatives house as they got scared that Rakesh will cause harm. I came to know through police that Rakesh has lodged a complaint against my parents alleging that they kidnapped me. I narrated the same version to Police when they examined me.”

¶33

In view of the statements of Ms. Suravarapu Sushmitha recorded u/s. 164 Cr.P.C., where she stated, amongst others, that she voluntarily went along with her mother to her home, the prayer made by the petitioner to direct the respondent Nos.3 and 4 to handover Ms. Suravarapu Sushmitha to him, is not favourably considered.

¶34

Accordingly, the writ petition fails and the same is disposed of. No costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

¶35

ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CJ NINALA JAYASURYA, J

¶36

¶37

¶38

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶39

¶40

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA

¶41

WRIT PETITION No. 14481 of 2021 (per Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ)

¶42

Dt: 03.09.2021

¶43

Matta Rakesh v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Matta Rakesh v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Vs Sri Satyasai Degree College

Shaik Jilani Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Potnuru Arun Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

S Kumari Vs the Station House Officer

Prl Secy Revenue Dept, Hyd and 4 Others Vs Chebolu Srinivas, Visakhapatnam and 11 Ot

Smt. G. Shakila, Tiurpati Vs Registrar, Sri Padmavathi Mahila Visvavidyalayam, Chittor Dt