Habeas corpus petition filed alleging illegal detention of Syam Kumar and Nagandla Navya. The court called the women, who confirmed voluntary stay with parents, leading to disposal.
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.
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
WRIT PETITION No. 21470 of 2015
Dt:16.07.2015
Between:
A.Venkatesh.
… Petitioner
And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.
… Respondents
HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT
WRIT PETITION No. 21470 of 2015
PC: (per the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Dilip B. Bhosale)
This Habeas Corpus Petition is filed by one Attota Venkatesh, S/o. Rama Rao contending that his brother Syam Kumar married Nagandla Navya on 13.06.2015 and after marriage their whereabouts are not known. In the petition, he has stated that they both are detained illegally by respondent Nos.4 and 5.
In view of the nature of allegations, on last occasion, we had directed learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3 to secure presence of Nagandla Navya and Syam Kumar in the Court. Accordingly, both are present in the Court. We asked Nagandla Navya, whether she has been illegally detained by her parents or any other person and her answer was in the negative. She submits that she has been staying with her parents since last 20 days willingly and she would like to continue to stay with them till she takes her decision or wish to stay with them. She also states that she is doing B-Pharma and she would like to pursue her studies. In view of her statement, we are satisfied that Nagandla Navya is not illegally detained by her parents, as alleged by the petitioner.
Mr.Syam Kumar is also present in the Court along with the
petitioner and his mother. He does not complain of illegal detention. In view of Mr.Syam Kumar’s presence in the Court, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press this writ petition insofar as Syam Kumar is concerned.
Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
_________________________ DILIP B. BHOSALE, ACJ ________________________ S.V. BHATT, J Dt:16.07.2015 kdl
1 provisions across 1 enactments
A.Venkatesh
The State of Andhra Pradesh
DILIP B. BHOSALE
S.V. BHATT
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
