Disposed

Gandikota Rajesh, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC17 Nov 2024WP/25764/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Habeas corpus writ by a husband alleging his wife, a major, was forcibly taken into custody by her father with police help. The detenue was produced and expressed a clear wish to stay with the petitioner. The court disposed of the petition permitting her to go with him, directing police not to hinder their movement, ensuring safe escort out of Andhra Pradesh, and allowing parental phone contact. N

What did the court decide?

Detenue permitted to go with petitioner of her choice; police directed not to hinder movement, ensure safe escort out of Andhra Pradesh; parents allowed periodic calls; no costs.

Gandikota Rajesh, Vs The State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

MONDAY. THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBEf^

¶5

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶6

¶7

PRESENT

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶9

AND

¶10

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM WRIT PETITION NO: 25764 OF 2024

¶11

Between:

¶12

Gandikota Rajesh, S/o Srinu, Occ; Driver, Aged about-^{20years,N/o-8-94,} Alluru Village, Veerulapadu Mandal, NTR District, Erst while Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh. Currently Residing atDattaipally village, Thurkapally Mandal.

¶13

...PETITIONER

¶14

AND

¶15

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Velagapudi, Amaravathi.

¶16

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary,^Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Hyderabad,^Telangana State.

¶17

The Director General of Police, State of Andhra Pradesh, Mangalagiri, Guntur District.

¶18

The Director General of Police, State of Telangana, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad.

¶19

The Crime Investigation Department, Rep by its Director^General, Mangalagiri, Guntur district.

¶20

The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda Police Commissionerate , Malkajgiri, Hyderabad.

¶21

The Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada Police Commissionerate , Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh.

¶22

The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Bhongir, Yadadri^{BhongirDistrict.} 9. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nandigama,^{NTRDistrict,Erst} while Krishna District.

¶23

The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Yadagirigutta^Divison, Yadadri Bhongir District.

¶24

The Station House Officer, Thurka Pally Police^{station, Yadadri} Bhuvanagiri District.

¶25

The Station House Officer, Jaggaiahpeta, NTR District,^Erstwhile Krishna District.

¶26

Upara Gopal Rao, S/o Babu, Age: 43 years, Occ:^{Carpenter,R/o-1-} 34, SC Colony, Kanneveedu Village, Vatsavai Mandal,^NTRDistrict, Erst while Krishna Dist.

¶27

...RESPONDENTS

¶28

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction^{moreparticularly} one in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents 3,4 to produce the detenue i.e. my wife Upara Rachel, D/o.^{UparaGopalRao,} aged about ;21 Yrs, Occ: House Wife, R/o.8-94, Alluru^{Village,Veerulapadu} Mandal, NTR District, Erst while Krishna District,^{AndhraPradesh.Currently} Residing at: Dattaipally Village, Thurkapally Mandal,^{TelanganaState} , who is in the illegal custody of 13'^ respondent and set^{herfreebydeclaringthe} action of the respondents 11,12 is illegal, arbitrary,^{unconstitutional,violatin} of Articles 14,16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

¶29

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶30

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition,^{theHighCourtmaybe} pleased to direct the respondent No.9 to produce the^{CCcamerafootageof} 12‘^ respondent police station before this Hon’ble^{Courtfrom08/09/2024to} 10/09/2024 in the light of law laid down by Hon’ble^{SupremeCourtofIndia}

¶31

in the case of SLP (CrI) No.3543 of 2020 Paramvirsingh Saini Vs Baljeet Singh& Others clt.2.12.2020, compensation of Rs.20,00,000 may be awarded to Detenue from Respondent No.11,12 the same shall be recoverable from the salaries of respondents 11,12 pending disposal of the writ petition

¶32

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI.PEETA RAMAN Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 12: THE ADDL. ADVOCATE

¶33

GENERAL

¶34

Counsel for the Respondent No.13:--The Court made the following: ORDER

¶35

¶36

APHC010502822024

¶37

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

¶38

AT AMARAVATI

¶39

[3508]

¶40

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶41

MONDAY ,THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶42

PRESENT

¶43

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶44

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MAHESWARA RAO KUNCHEAM

¶45

WRIT PETITION NO: 25764/2024

Between:

Gandikota Rajesh,

...PETITIONER

AND

The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶51

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶52

1.PEETA RAMAN

¶53

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶54

1 .THE ADVOCATE GENERAL

¶55

The Court made the following Order:

¶56

The petitioner has filed the present writ of Habeas Corpus contending that the detenue and he had married despite which the 13^*^ respondent, who is the father of the detenue, had forcibly taken away^{thedetenuewiththe} assistance of the policemen of Jaggaiahpet Police Station and that they were

¶57

not permitting the petitioner and the detenue to stay together.

¶58

The petitioner has made various allegations against^the 13 th respondent and the policemen in the 12*'^ respondent policemen. We do^not

¶59

¶60

propose to go into these issues, in view of the orders that are being passed in this writ petition.

¶61

The detenue has been produced before us today. The 13 th respondent and his wife are also present in Court.

¶62

We have interacted with the petitioner, the detenue and the parents of the detenue separately.

¶63

The detenue has expressed her intention to stay with the petitioner and has stated that she is unable to stay with the petitioner on account of the interference by the 12'^ respondent and other police officials. She states that she wished to remain in the company of the petitioner and complete her education.

¶64

The petitioner has stated that he is willing to take^careofthe detenue apart from ensuring that she completes her studies in B.Com (Taxation) which she is presently pursuing in Guntur.

¶65

The 13‘^ respondent and his wife have expressed severe reservations in sending the detenue with the petitioner on the ground that the conduct of the petitioner is not proper and that they fear for the safety and life of their daughter.

¶66

In the normal course, this Court would have passed necessary directions to assuage the said reservations expressed by the parents of the detenue. However, this Court would have to honour the wishes of the detenue

¶67

¶68

as she is a major and is very clear in her choices.^As the detenue has specifically stated that she wished to go with the petitioner, this Court has no choice except to accept such a decision.

¶69

However, the concerns of the parents cannot be brushed away. This Court is faced with the difficult choice of ensuring^thefreedom of the detenue while also ensuring that the concerns of the parents are addressed.

¶70

In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶71

1. The detenue is free to go with the petitioner to^{thedestinationofher} choice;

¶72

1. Neither the 12'^ respondent nor any police official^{shallhinderthe} movement of the detenue and the petitioner who have expressed their desire to go to Bhuvanagiri in Telangana State;

¶73

1. The petitioner has also stated that he has not filed any criminal case against the 13^'^ respondent or any other person, in relation to the detention of the detenue;

¶74

1. Though the detenue is free to go with the petitioner, it would be appropriate to ensure that there is communication between the detenue and her parents;

¶75

1. For the purpose, the 13**^ respondent and his wife would be at liberty to call the detenue and ascertain her wellbeing and^whereabouts

¶76

from time to time. Any such call shall not be treated as harassment by the detenue or the petitioner;

¶77

For this purpose of ensuring safe passage to the detenue and the petitioner, the police personnel accompanying the detenue shall ensure that the detenue and the petitioner are safely^{escortedoutof} Andhra Pradesh.

¶78

As sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶79

To,

¶80

Sd/- M. SRINIVAS
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
sec^tc5n officer

¶81

The Principal Secretary, Home Department, State of Andhra Pradesh,

¶82

Velagapudi, Amaravathi. (BY RPAD)

¶83

The Principal Secretary, Home Department, ‘ State of Telangana,

¶84

Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Hyderabad, Telangana State. (BY

¶85

RPAD)

¶86

The Director General of Police, State of Andhra Pradesh, Mangalagiri

¶87

Guntur District. (BY RPAD)

¶88

The Director General of Police, State of Telangana Lakdikapool, Hyderabad. (BY RPAD)

¶89

The Crime Investigation Department, Rep by its Director Generai, Mangalagiri, Guntur District. (BY RPAD)

¶90

The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda Police Commissionerate,

¶91

Malkajgiri, Hyderabad. (BY RPAD)

¶92

The Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada Police Commissionerate,

¶93

Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh. (BY RPAD)

¶94

The Deputy Commissioner of Police Bhongir, Yadadri Bhongir District.

¶95

(BY RPAD)

¶96

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Nandigama,^{NTRDistrict,Erst} while Krishna District. (BY RPAD)

¶97

The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Yadagirigutta Divison, Yadadri Bhongir District. (BY RPAD)

¶98

The Station House Officer, Thurka Pally Police station,^Yadadri Bhuvanagiri District. (BY RPAD)

¶99

The Station House Officer, Jaggaiahpeta, NTR District,^Erstwhile Krishna District. (BY RPAD)

¶100

Upara Gopal Rao, S/o Babu, Age: 43 years, Occ: Carpenter, R/o1-34, SC Colony, Kanneveedu Village, Vatsavai Mandal,^NTR District, Erst while Krishna Dist. (BY SPEED POST)

¶101

One CC to Sri Peeta Raman, Advocate [OPUC]

¶102

Two CC’s to the Advocate General, High Court of^{A.P.atAmaravati}

¶103

[OPUC]

¶104

Three CD Copies.

¶105

Ssb Note: The Typographical mistake in “marking of the Copy to the Respondent No.13’’ is rectified. Substitute this amended order in place of earlier Order which was dispatched on 25.11.2024.

¶106

Sd/- P.U.V. BHASKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

HIGH COURT

DATED:18/11/2024

(AMENDED) ORDER

WP.No.25764 of 2024

i 2 9 NOV 202'. m
. Current Section

¶112

DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS

Gandikota Rajesh, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gandikota Rajesh, 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

K.S.K.v.Prasada Rao Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Malli Sai Enterprises Vs the Commercial Tax Officer

Malli Sai Enterprises Vs The Commercial Tax Officer (Int)

Muchu Venkateswara Rao, Vs The state of Andhra Pradesh

Smt.Ramisetty Lingamma, Vs Smt.Ramisetty Alivelu Manga Tayaru

V.Krishna Murthy, Vs Mr.B.Raja Sekhar