¥ V V APHC010304842025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) B THURSDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 15294 OF 202fi Between: Ellipilli Ravi, S/o- Sreeramulu, aged- 43 Dukkavanipalem, Anandapuram, Visakhapatnam. R/o- D.No.3-98, ...Petitioner AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Department of Home, Principal Secretary, Secretariat Buildings, Amaravati. Rep. by its 2. The Commissioner of Police, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 3. The Station House Officer, Bheemunipatnam Police Bheemunipatnam, Visakhapatnam District. Station 4. Ellipilli Hemalatha, W/o- Ravi, aged- 33 R/o- D.No.1-43-180, years, Balaji nagar, Tagarapuvalasa, Visakhapatnam. 5. Jaggupilli Nani Gangadhar, S/o Appala Suri, aged 35, R/o D.No. 1-43- 180, Balaji nagar, Tagarapuvalasa, Visakhapatnam. 6. Jagupilli Chittemma, W/o-Appala Suri, aged- 54, R/o- D.No. 1-43-180, Balaji nagar, Tagarapuvalasa, Visakhapatnam ...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 of Habeas Corpus directing respondent forthwith produce, Sri Ellipilli Kishan Swaroop S/o Ellipilli Ravi before this Hon’ble Court and set him at liberty enabling the to take care of his education, nourishment and day to day needs. lA NO: 1 OF 2Q2fi Petition under Section 151 CPC nos. 2 to 7 to , aged- 11 years. petitioner(father) praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct respondent nos. 2 to 7 to forthwith produce, Sri Ellipilli S/o Ellipilli Ravi, aged: 11 years, before this Hon’ble Court and set him at liberty enabling the petitioner(father) to take care of his education nourishment and day to day needs. Kishan Swaroop Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P VIVEK Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondents: SRI BOMMINAYUNI APPARAO Counsel for the Respondents: SRI APPA RAO BHEEMISETTY Counsel for the Respondents: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 to 6: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following order: APHC010304842025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3541] THURSDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 15294/2025 Between: Ellipilli Ravi ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.P VIVEK Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.BOMMINAYUNI APPARAO 2.APPA RAO BHEEMISETTY 3.THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following order: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) ...RESPONDENT{S) Heard Sri Posani Venkateswarlu, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri P. Vivek, Sri B. Apparao, learned counsel appearing for the unofficial respondents and the learned Government Pleader in the office of the learned Advocate General. 2 RRR,J & Js, W.P.No. 15294 of 2025 2. The petitioner is married to respondent No.5. They have two children namely Kishan Swaroop born in 2015 and Ramitha born in 2019. Due to marital differences, the 5“^ respondent is said to have left the matrimonial home on 11.12.2024 in Kothavalasa, Vizianagaram and shifted to the house of her parents at Tagarapuvalasa, Visakhapatnam after leaving the children with the petitioner. 3. The petitioner contends that on 21.01.2025 he was physically restrained by respondents 5 to 7 and threatened with dire consequences if he did not handover the children to the 4*^ respondent. A complaint in this regard is said to have been filed with the respondent and registered as Crime No.41 of 2025. Thereafter, respondents 5 to 7 along with 17 other people are said to have surrounded the car of the petitioner when he was returning along with his son on 28.03.2025, from the school where his son was studying and that the son of the petitioner was forcibly taken away by the set of people. The petitioner has approached this Court for restoration of 4. custody of his son, to him, on the ground that his son had been taken away forcibly from his custody, by the 4*'^ respondent, and consequently the custody of the 4^'' respondent over his son would be illegal. The petitioner also contends that the future of his son would be affected as his son was not being permitted to attend school and was in the custody of RRR,J & JS,J W.P.No.l5294 of2025 A people who are unlettered and would not be able to take proper care of the child. 5. The 4'^ respondent filed a counter affidavit in which it stated that the 4*'' respondent had left the marital home on account of the harassment meted out to her by the petitioner for additional dowry. She contends that she had taken her son from the marital home 28.03.2025 and all other allegations are false. was on 6. On account of these allegations, we directed the presence of the 4*'' respondent and the child on 24.06.2025. We interacted with the child, in our chambers, on 08.07.2025. In the course of the interaction, the child stated that he is presently studying in a school in Visakhapatnam and that he is living with his mother in his maternal grandmother’s house. We found the child to be normal and cheerful. 7. The question of whether the child was forcibly taken away from the father or not, can be determined only after a proper enquiry, in this regard, is carried out. Further, the question of custody of the child should be best left to the Family Court/Civil Court which would have jurisdiction in this matter. These are issues, which this Court would not enter, while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4 RRR,J&JS,j W.P.No. 15294 of 2025 ^ 8. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of leaving all issues open for the petitioner to agitate before the appropriate Court, for custody of his son or for such other reliefs that the petitioner deems fit. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K. SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat Buildings, Amaravati. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Visakhapatnam, District. 3. The Station House Officer, Bheemunipatnam Police Station Bheemunipatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 4. One CC to Sri. P Vivek Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri. Bomminayuni Apparao, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri. Appa Rao Bheemisetty Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to The Advocate General, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT]. 8. Two CD Copies. Visakhapatnam AL HIGH COURT HEBEAS CORPUS DATED:14/08/2025 ORDER WP NO. 15294 OF 2025 g( 2 t AUG 2025 jm Co Sectjoi^x^y DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS