IN THE HTGH COUQT O? KAQNATAKA AT BANGALODE
DATED THES THE 20"" DAY OF JANUAQY 2010
PRESENT
THE i-iO§\€"8{E MRJUSTECE KS9EEeHAR.--.R:AQ.fc:'V' A
AND
THE HONBLE MRJUSTICE:'€:,*u8'HTA'SH'TTe.A5i'y
wen PETSTION (H'c{:n:o.2o2r'2rJo9e
BETWEEN:
Sri; Srinivas YAS
Sic iate Subbannac.ia§'s::_V ~
Age: 5% years. _ . A
Occ: Medical F?'epr'e'eer*£i'ai.a._ve,"-.jf-.We __ V.
R50 Sri Veni<aie=sh"»3ner's dau"ght'1er'As'n.wi..ni'Y,S.:
before this Hon’bie Court and hand over physica~I’icustod’3’_.to épeltitioriveir
forthwith. _
foliowingz
V B. E
One Kum.Ash.Wini, agedihaboiu-t.’2.?t iuearsiitsisiiithe daughter ot
the petitiqifieff petitii’on’erV:state’s”that his daughter is missing
since 4.1 t.’2.0t)9. V He complaint oetote the Police.
Case isV:fegiste’%ed’un.d.erE3ec’tions 363, 366 and 309 EPC against
it Eevspo ndiem;-sE\io’;i-3 aad one” Gopal.
ii’=:”a..,’tseat’t:–ed’T;iCounsel tor the petitionet submits that the
i’espon.ctent”V.t\io.’§ has enticed his daughter. who is rnentaity iii
….iV’s.utienng item episodic psychosis. The respondent No.3 has
“*–o–ra’ii’tvt?ashed the detenue. The custody of the detenue with third
‘V V “r.e.spondei1t is iilegai and not out of free consent. tie states that
y
This Petition coming on fO{ ord’e.r:s”ithis da’y,._th’e. rhade the
the Poiice have not taken efteetive action against the complaint.
Hence. Writ of Habeas Corpus is filed.
(3. The resperiderrt No.3 has appeared throug[1.._CoVLtn.’s;e’t-,V
atong with the detenue. The court made enqniriies vxj/jitwtii’ ‘
detenue. She states that she was in toye yi_ri’ti’..respond’e.r_it._N’o’.3’5
for the past two years. She diVs.ci_osed”~–her.. iove_tatta’iir
parents and her intention to marry re’spo’r1dent’hr3,”‘:3_jhfheivparents
tortured and harassed her ‘.hio:sVti.iie’attitudeiwaoainst her
and prevented her from No.3. The
detenue states ‘_ef.Vt:r’–eei._wE;iE.phshiehhas-«»r:riarried respondent
No.3 V:”‘i?’he’:§dVetenue aiso states that
she is ohanged her name as Noor
Fathima. Ttievdetenuei fti’rtt14e”r–._st’a’tes that she had tear psychosis
few years’ ‘each titrtrtyehv she was made to steep alone by her
“pare’nt_s_. Sr-.9 ‘»r4v4a~sv becoming sleeptess and deveioped some sort
oi dLtri_ng time but she has been treated for about two
rnoiiths”ant§_sh’e”has become airight.
A = eriauiry made with the detenue by the court reveats
‘:’vth_,at.Fshe is of SOi,i.Fid state of mind and nut of tree vetitien has
rnarried respondent No.3. in the circumstances. we find that
&//
there ss no case of mega! detefltiorl 0r abduction as sought :0 be
pmjecied by the peiitiorwey in the peméon.
Hence. the ;::»eti%i0n is dismissed.
Sd/”*1
sw
%<N$\f1f-