APHC010286972025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURESH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 14344 OF 2025 Between: D. Zeenath, S/o. D. Abdul, Aged 34 years, R/o. 12-511, Renigunta, Chitoor District. Bugga Street, ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its PrI. Secretary, Department Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District. 2. The Director General of Police, Govt of Andhra Pradesh, Mangalagiri, Guntur District. 3. The Superintendent of police, Chittor, Chittor District. 4. The Station House Officer, Renigunta Police Station, Renigunta. 5. The Station House Officer, Alipiri Police Station, Tirupathi District. 6. The Station House Officer, Chittor Taluka Police Station, Chittor District. 7. K Chitti Babu, S/o. Venkatesh, CM Colony, Chittor District. Home ...Respondents 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS being aggrieved by the inaction of the % Respondents more particularly Respondents 4 to 6 in not initiating any action against the 7'^ Respondent and his supporters who illegally abducted my minor daughter, continued illegal custody and sexual assault and to produce the minor girl Detenue Viz., Dudekula Sharmeen, aged 17 years, R/o 12-511, Bugga Street, Renigunta, Chitoor District and to direct the respondents to set her free and to hand over the detenue to the petitioner herein, and not to interfere in any manner with her personal liberty. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BILAAL AHMED SYED Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 6 : THE ADVOCATE GENERAL Counsel for the Respondent No.7 : NONE APPEARED The Court made the following order: APHC010286972025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3492] FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 14344/2025 Between: 1.D ZEENATH, S/0 D. ABDUL, AGED 34 YEARS, R/0 12-511, BUGGA STREET, RENIGUNTA, CHITOOR DISTRICT. . ...PETITIONER AND HOME 1.THE STATE OF AP, REP., BY ITS PRI. SECRETARY DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. ( 2.THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GOVT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3.THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, CHITTOR, CHITTOR DISTRICT. 4.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, RENIGUNTA POLICE STATION, RENIGUNTA. 5.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, ALIPIRI POLICE STATION, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. 6.THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CHITTOR TALUKA POLICE STATION, CHITTOR DISTRICT. 7.K CHITTI BABU, S/O VENKATESH, CM COLONY, CHITTOR DISTRICT. V -4 •■■RESPONDENT(S): Pfitition uncl6r Artirip' +u /-> circumstances stated in the affidavit fifed Pleased topleased to issue a 1 f /di !r '' "" the nature of WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS . ' Particularly one in the Respondents more particularly Re^n the inaction of action against the 7fh ResSem and h° ' ' ® "'‘"‘'"9 my minor daughter, continue illegal curtodr^ ' produce the minor girl Detenue 12-511 and sexual VIZ.. Dudekula Sharmeen Renigunta, Chitoor and to hand I interfere in any manner with assault and to aged 17 years, R/o Bugga Street, respondents to set her free herein, and not to i ' District and to direct the over the detenue to the i her personal liberty and petitioner pass Counsel for the Petitioner: f - BILAAL AHMED SYED Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.THE ADVOCATE GENERAL 3 The Court made the following Order: (perHon’ble Sh Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner has approached this Court with the complaint that her daughter by name Dudekula Shamreen, had been abducted by the 7‘^ respondent and that her daughter should be produced before this Court and custody, of her daughter, should be restored to her. This relief is sought on the ground that the alleged detenue is a minor who is less than 18 years old. 2. The certificates produced, by the petitioner, to demonstrate the age of birth of the alleged detenue, contradicted each other in as much as the certificate of birth issued by the Gram Panchayat showed that the alleged detenue was less than 18 years old while, the Secondary School Certificate shows that she is more than 18 years old. 3. The alleged detenue was produced before this Court, on 01.05.2025. She was examined, in camera, by a Bench of this Court. In the course of such examination, the alleged detenue stated that she had married the respondent and wanted to continue to live with him. She categorically stated that she is not interested in going back to the house of her mother. She also stated that Secondary School Certificate showed her actual date of birth and that she was a major. The petitioner insisted that the Secondary School Certificate was not correct and that the birth certificate issued by the Gram Panchayat was the correct certificate. The petitioner further contended that the alleged detenue remains a minor and should be sent back to her custody. 4. This Court, on 01.07.2025, directed the Superintendent, Sri Venkateswara Institute of Medical Sciences, Tirupati, to take steps for the conduct of an age test, on the alleged detenue, and submit a report by the next date of hearing. 5. 6. Today when the case is called, both the petitioner as well as the alleged detenue are personally present before this Court. The age estimation 4 P certificate issued by the Associate Professor, Department of Forensic Medicine, Sri Venkateswara Institute of Medical Sciences, Sri Padmavathi Medical College for Women, Tirupati, dated 02.07.2025, has been placed before us in a sealed cover. The age estimation certificate states that the alleged detenue aged between 18 to 19 years. 7. 8. In the circumstances, it is clear that the alleged detenue is a major and is entitled to take decisions as to where she wants to live and with whom she wants to live. The alleged detenue is a major and has stated that she wishes to go back to the 7*^ respondent and is not interested in staying with the petitioner. As such no case of illegal detention or custody is made out against the 7**^ respondent. This Writ Petition is dismissed leaving it open to the alleged detenue to stay where she wishes to stay. 9. The police personnel from Chittoor Taluka Police Station, Chittoor District, shall escort the alleged detenue safely back to the house of the 7 respondent. There shall be no order as to costs. 10. th As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any shall stand closed. Sd/- N NAGAMMA ASSISTANT registrar r SECTION officer //TRUE COPY// To, 1. One CC to Sri Bilaal Ahmed Syed, Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to The Advocate General, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati [OUT] 3. Two CD Copies Cnr ■ t, HIGH COURT DATED:04/07/2025 ORDER WP NO. 14344 OF 2025 DISMISSING THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS