A grandfather filed a writ of habeas corpus seeking production of his granddaughter from the custody of her new husband and in-laws. The court examined the counter-affidavit and the detenu's police statement.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
MONDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF OCTOBER, TWO THOUSAND AND TWELVE
PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.RAMANA AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 32538 OF 2012
Between:
Tekumudi Krishna Murthy
..... Petitioner
AND
The Superintendent of Police, East Godavari District at Kakinada and others
..... Respondents
The Court made the following:
ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice N.V. Ramana)
Seeking production of the alleged detenu namely Tekamudi Vinaya Surya Anjani, aged about 19 years, before this court from the illegal custody of the respondent Nos. 3 to 5, the present writ of habeas corpus is filed by the
petitioner, who is her grandfather.
It is the case of the petitioner that on 4.10.2012, as the alleged detenu, a student of B.Tech., III year, in JNTU, Kakinada, was not found in the house, his daughter and son-in-law, in whose house the alleged detenu was staying, lodged a complaint with the second respondent police alleging that the respondents 3 to 5 have kidnapped her inasmuch as the third respondent, who is the son of the respondents 4 and 5, was proclaiming to be in love with the alleged detenu.
Pursuant to the notice issued by this court, the second respondent filed counter affidavit, the sum and substance of which is that the alleged detenu and the third respondent have approached the first respondent with a written representation stating that both of them are majors and as they are in love with each other, they got married on 4.10.2012 at Vishnu Alayam, Kakinada, as per Hindu customs and rites and also got the marriage registered in the office of the Marriage Registrar, Kakinada on 5.10.2012. The counter affidavit further shows that on receipt of information from the office of the learned Advocate General, the second respondent has deputed a Woman Head Constable, who recorded the statement of the alleged detenu wherein the alleged detenu has stated that the third respondent, who is studying IV Year B.Tech, at Aditya Engineering College, Sorampalem, East Godavari, is her friend and for the last two years they were in love and since
the petitioner and her uncle have warned her not to move with the third respondent, she left their house on 3.10.2012, joined the company of the third respondent, married him voluntarily on 4.10.2012 and also got the marriage registered on 5.10.2012. The counter affidavit further shows that the alleged detenu stated to the police that she does not want the interference of her relatives in her married life.
The statement of the alleged detenu recorded by the police makes it clear that she is a major, her date of birth being 9.12.1992, as can be evidenced from her Secondary School Certificate. The statement further makes it clear that she married the third respondent voluntarily on 4.10.2012 at Vishnu Alayam, Kakinada and also got the marriage registered on 5.10.2012 with the Registrar of Marriages, Kakinada, as can be evidenced from the photographs and the Certificate of Marriage issued by the Marriage Registrar, Kakinada. In view of the said statement of the alleged detenu, who is a major and also in view of the Marriage Certificate, it is evident that she is voluntarily residing with the respondents 3 to 5 and, as such, the petitioner cannot seek issuance of writ of habeas corpus against the respondents.
Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Justice N.V. Ramana
Justice P.Durga Prasad
October 29, 2012 MAS.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a petition for habeas corpus can be maintained against the custodies of a major individual who voluntarily married a man and resides with him.
Whether the statement of the alleged detenu recording her voluntary marriage and absence of objection invalidates the petition for the production of the person.
Tekumudi Krishna Murthy
The Superintendent of Police, East Godavari District at Kakinada
Tekamudi Vinaya Surya Anjani
N.V. Ramana
P. Durga Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
