APHC010464872025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] MONDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR WRIT PETITION NO: 23530/2025 Between: 1. PAMULA SRIKANTH, S/O RAJA RAO, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, OCC PRIVATE BUSINESS, R/O 5-50/1, DAVULURU, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH-522304. CELL NO 919346097933. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, , GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, KOLLIPARA POLICE STATION, GUNTUR, ANDHRA PRADESH. 5. MIKKILI JEEVAN LACTO, S/O LATE MIKKILI KRISHNAIAH, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCC PASTOR, R/O H.NO 12-109, ADARSH NAGAR, OPP.I.D.P.L COLONY, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA-500037. CELL NO 918333930750. 6. MIKKILI SHANTHI, W/O JEEVAN LACTO, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O H.NO 12-109, ADARSH NAGAR, 2 OPP.I.D.P.L COLONY, HYDERABAD, TELANGANA-500037. CELL NO 917036357717. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 topleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more Particularly, issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the Respondents 2 to 4 to produce the Petitioners daughter, namely Pamula Akshya, before this Honble High Court and handover the custody of the child to the Petitioner and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the Respondents 2 to 4 to produce the Petitioners daughter, namely Pamula Akshya, before this Hon’ble High Court pending disposal of the main Writ Petition and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. VENKATA MOHAN RAO PATHAKOTA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. SHAIK SHAHEDAZ 2. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL 3 The Court made the following Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a Writ of Habeas Corpus to be issued to the respondents 5 & 6 for production of his daughter, the alleged detenue, on the ground that they were illegally detaining his daughter and that his daughter should be restored to his custody. 2. The case of the petitioner is that his wife had passed away in a train accident, on 10.01.2012 and thereafter his daughter was residing with his mother-in-law, who also happens to be the maternal aunt of the petitioner. He further states that his mother-in-law, who is also his maternal aunt, died on 19.09.2017, after which the daughter of the petitioner had been taken away by the respondents 5 & 6 on 19.09.2017. The petitioner further stated that he spoke with his daughter once in June, 2023 and thereafter, he had no contact with his daughter and did not know about the whereabouts of the respondents 5 & 6. 3. The petitioner, claims that he has now approached this Court as he was scared for the life and safety of his daughter and that the police authorities could not help him to ascertain the whereabouts of the alleged detenue. This Court, in view of the aforesaid allegations, had directed production of the alleged detenue before us. The alleged detenue is personally present in the Court today. We have also interacted with her in chambers. 4. The alleged detenue states that the petitioner never took care of her and had, in fact assaulted her physically on various occasions even when 4 her mother was alive. She would further state that he is sitting on the property belonging to her maternal grandmother and which would, in the normal course devolve upon her, in view of the death of the mother and maternal grandmother. 5. The alleged detenue is presently aged 17 years, one day and appears to be mature enough to understand the ways of the world and take care of herself. She has also stated that she is presently pursuing her plus 2 education, and that her maternal uncle has been taking care of her since the demise of her mother. 6. In view of the details set out by the alleged detenue, which we do not propose to record, for obvious reasons, we are of the opinion that this Writ Petition is an abuse of the process of this Court and filed solely for obtaining the benefit of the properties that would devolve upon the alleged detenue and not on account of any alleged love and affection for his daughter. 7. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.15,000/- to be paid to the High Court Legal Service Committee, within a period of two weeks. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any shall stand closed. _______________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J. _________________ T.C.D. SEKHAR, J. Dated: 13.10.2025 BSM 5 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR W.P.No.23530/2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) Date: 13.10.2025 BSM