C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J.

1. The petitioner and respondent No. 4 are man and wife. Their marriage was performed on 12.2.2009 in India. Even prior to his marriage with respondent No. 4, the petitioner was living in United Kingdom (UK) since 2004. He has been working as Physiotherapy Team Manager with National Health Services, UK for the last fourteen years. After her marriage, respondent No. 4 joined the company of the petitioner in UK in March, 2009 and acquired the permanent UK residency, i.e. Indefinite Leave to remain in UK, and till May 2017 respondent No. 4 lived with the petitioner in UK. The couple were blessed with two male children, by name, Abhinav Tippa and Divit Tippa. The first son was born on 3.1.2011 and the second son was born on 7.7.2015. Both of them having been born in UK, they acquired UK citizenship by birth. The elder son was admitted in a school called Jellybabies Nursery and has studied Nursery and Pre-school during 2013-2015 and was admitted in Reception School in 2015-16 and Colmers Farm Primary School in 2016-17. There is no dispute about the aforementioned facts.

2. The marital life of the couple ran into rough whether with respondent No. 4 giving a police complaint leading to registration of a criminal case against the petitioner on 13.5.2017 and the latter was arrested for the alleged domestic violence against respondent No. 4 in the UK. The petitioner remained in judicial custody for 24 hours and was thereafter granted conditional bail with the restraint order that he shall not enter his home in UK for four weeks. During this period of four weeks, respondent No. 4 has come down to India along with the two minor children on 28.5.2017. The petitioner filed a petition for divorce/dissolution of marriage on 5.7.2017 in a UK Court. Respondent No. 4 has submitted herself to the jurisdiction of the Court and filed a reply in response to the divorce petition. The petitioner also filed a Wardship petition before the High Court of Justice, Family Division, UK under Child Protection and Custody Act, 1985. Vide its order dt. 18.10.2017 the UK Court declared the two minor children as its wards with a direction to respondent No. 4 to cause return of the minor children to the jurisdiction of England and Wales by 6.11.2017. On an another petition filed by the petitioner, the High Court of Justice, Family Division, vide order dt. 18.12.2017 directed that both the minor children shall remain wards of the UK Court during their minority or until further order and also directed respondent No. 4 to return the children forthwith to England & Wales within fourteen days of receipt of the said order. The Court has also rendered a finding that the two minor children were wrongfully removed from the jurisdiction of the UK Court which has exclusive jurisdiction in matters of parental responsibility over the child pursuant on articles 8 and 18 of Brussels II Regulation (BIIR).

3. After coming to India, respondent No. 4 has filed G.W.O.P. No. 92 of 2017 in the Court of the Additional District Judge, Madanapalle, inter alia to declare the petitioner as unfit to act as natural guardian and to declare respondent No. 4 as legal guardian to the two minor children till the date of attaining their majority both personally as well as for their properties. As respondent No. 4 has not responded to the orders passed by the UK Court to return the custody of the minor children to the Court, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for habeas corpus directing the respondents to produce the two minor children in court to enable them to go back to the UK.

4. In response to the notice issued by this Court, respondent No. 4 has filed a counter affidavit. She has inter alia stated that the UK Court has passed the orders after she left the country and therefore they do not bind her. She denied the allegation that she removed the two minor children from UK illegally. She averred that she purchased return tickets to go back to UK and