HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HON’BLE JUSTICE GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.4345 OF 2026 DATE:12.02.2026 Between Gurram Shravan Kumar ...Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Hyderabad and four others.

…Respondents M/s.Disha Law Firm, appearing for the petitioner.

Mr.Ravi Kumar, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4.

ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya)

1. The Writ Petition has been filed seeking a Writ of Habeas Corpus for releasing the alleged detenu from the ‘illegal detention’ of the respondent No.5.

2. The petitioner claims to be the father of the alleged detenu, who is a minor boy of five years. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.5 is the mother of the alleged detenu.

3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader is present and has filed the Written Instructions issued by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Narsingi Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate.

4. The Written Instructions contain specific averments to the effect that the petitioner and the respondent No.5 were married in 2019 and had a son (alleged detenu) in 2020. The respondent No.5 left the petitioner in 2022 and returned to her native place along with the alleged detenu on the ground that the respondent No.5 had been subjected to physical and mental harassment and cruelty.

5. The statement of the respondent No.5 is also part of the Written Instructions wherein the respondent No.5 states that since she was harassed and tortured by the petitioner, she lodged a complaint at the Miyapur Police Station under the provisions of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 and The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. The respondent No.5 further states that the alleged detenu is presently living with her.

6. The learned Assistant Government Pleader also submits that the petitioner has not filed any complaint with the respondent No.4/SHO, Narsingi Police Station, Ranga Reddy District.

7. The Written Instructions have been shared with learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

8. After considering the submissions and undisputed facts, we are of the opinion that this is not a case of Habeas Corpus since the petitioner has an available remedy for seeking custody of the alleged detenu or for other reliefs under the appropriate statute.

9. W.P.No.4345 of 2026, along with all connected applications, is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, J GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, J Date: 12.02.2026

EDS