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 an order, direction or Writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents no. 3 to 5 to produce the Petitioners Daughter by namely B. Sujatha W/o B. Subrahmanyam, R/o D.no. 7-626, Near RTC Bus stand, Sri Kalahasti Town, Tirupati District, A.P., Pin. 517644 before this Honble Court from detainment of Respondent no. 6 who missed from the Sri Kalahasti Town on 29.01.2026 and set her free to go with parents i.e.. Petitioner no. 1 (Father) and Petitioner no. 2 (Mother), and to pass

The Court made the following:

ORDER:

(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy)

1. This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India for Habeas Corpus is filed by the petitioners, seeking direction to respondent No.3-the Superintendent of Police of Tirupati District, to produce the corpus by name G.Dhanalakshmi, who is a major, wife of G.Hari Prasad, before the Court, alleged to have been in illegal detention of respondent No.6, who was found missing from the Kalahasti Town from 29.01.2026 and then to set her at liberty.

2. Heard Mr. Shaik Afzal Mohammed, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader attached to the office of learned Advocate General appearing for the official respondent Nos.1 to 5. Since we are disposing of this writ petition, as per the material placed before the Court by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, as not maintainable, notice to unofficial respondent No.6 is dispensed with.

3. The petitioners are the parents of a woman by name G.Dhanalakshmi. She is a fully grown up woman, aged about 34 years. She is also a married woman. She has been living with her husband by name G.Hari Prasad in Kalahasti Town. They are also blessed with two children during their lawful wedlock. While she was living with her husband G.Hari Prasad, she was found missing from 29.01.2026.

4. It is pleaded in the writ petition by the petitioners, who are her parents that it has come to their knowledge that the corpus, who is her daughter, earlier was in relationship with respondent No.6 and they used to have conversation over phone and that respondent No.6 has taken her away and wrongfully confined her against her will and her whereabouts are not known. It is further pleaded that they have strong reason to believe that their daughter, who is the corpus, is under illegal detention of respondent No.6 and she is under threat and undue influence of respondent No.6.

5. From the aforesaid pleadings in the writ petition, it is not the specific case of the petitioners that the corpus was taken away by the 6th respondent and has illegally confined her and kept her under his undue influence under threat. It is only stated in a vague manner in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that it came to their knowledge that he has taken her away and illegally confined her and kept her under undue influence. How the said fact came to their knowledge is not stated in detail in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. So, it is a vague plea taken by them. They themselves are not sure that the corpus was taken away by the 6th respondent and illegally confined her.

6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents, on instructions, submits that while the corpus was residing with her husband by name G.Hari Prasad that she left the house voluntarily on 29.01.2026 and left his company and since then, she was found missing. It is stated that her husband G.Hari Prasad has also lodged a report with the Police on 30.01.2026, alleging that his wife, who is the corpus, went to bazaar at 4.00 P.M., on 29.01.2026 on the pretext of purchasing fruits and other articles for pooja purpose and thereafter, she did not return home and requested the Police to tra