Gade Sandeep Kumar vs State Of Telangana

The issue involved in both the writ petitions is connected and hence they are heard together, and are being disposed of by this common order.

The case of the petitioner in W.P.No.13249 of 2021 is that he married one Ms. Adepu Srinidi, who is the daughter of the 3rd respondent herein

(Adepu Balakrishna), at Arya Samaj, Hasamparthy, Warangal District Urban on 22.05.2021, and that their marriage was a love marriage. His further

case is that the 3rd respondent, who is the father of his wife, and the 4th respondent, who is the brother of the 3rd respondent, who are against their

marriage, are harassing them, and therefore, he filed the present writ petition for ordering of police protection.

The 3rd respondent in W.P.No.13249 of 2021, who is the father of Ms. Adepu Srinidi (alleged detenue), filed the other writ petition being

W.P.No.21962 of 2021, stating that her daughter is only 17 years and ten months as on the date of filing of the writ petition, as she was born on

24.11.2003, and that the 4th respondent herein, who is the petitioner in W.P.No.13249 of 2021, who is more than double the age of her daughter, lured

her, and she eloped with him, and that he lodged a complaint on 21.05.2021, and the same was registered only on 05.06.2021; that the 4th respondent

married their daughter showing her age as 19 years, though she is a minor and, hence marriage cannot be considered as a valid marriage; that they

received a communication from the 4th respondent on 06.09.2021 stating that if they want their daughter alive, they should come for settlement, which

obviously meant money; and that he apprehends threat to the life of his daughter (Ms. Adepu Srinidi). With these averments, he sought for a direction

to respondents 2 and 3 - police authorities, to produce his daughter before the court and to handover her to him.

This court on 14.06.2021 in W.P.No.13249 of 2021 directed the 2nd respondent â€" Station House Officer, Mahabubabad Police Station, Warangal

not to interfere with the disputes between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent, and also not to harass the petitioner, his parents as well as the

witnesses to the marriage and relatives of the petitioner.

The 3rd respondent in W.P.No.13249 of 2021 field counter affidavit denying the allegations made in the writ affidavit and stating that his daughter is

minor and that he lodged a complaint with the Police Station K.Samudram on 5.6.2021 and the same was registered as Cr.No.92 of 2021 and is under

investigation, and that the writ petitioner herein is not co-operating with the investigation. Therefore, he sought for vacating of the interim order dated

14.06.2021 passed by this court, and to dismiss the writ petition.

In W.P.No.13249 of 2021, counter affidavit is also filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent â€" Station House Officer, Mahabubabad Police Station.

The deponent of the counter affidavit is one Sri S.Ravi Kumar s/o Rajanna, working as Circle Inspector of Police, Mahabubabad Rural, Mahabubabad

District. In the counter affidavit at paragraph Nos.7 and 8 it is stated as under:

“7. It is submitted that being Investigating Officer, I have examined the complainant and recorded the statement in detail and collected the

photographs of the victim girl and also names and addresses of their relatives as well as full particulars of victim girl and efforts were made to trace

the missing girl. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer approached the Head Master, Vignan High School, Inugurthy and

obtained her date of birth certificate, which indicates that on 24.11.2002, which indicates that she is major as on the date of marriage i.e., 22.05.2021.

During the course of investigation, the Investigation Officer collected the SSC Memo from the friend of the 4 th respondent namely Kommu Madhu,

R/o Dharmaram on 21.09.2021. After ascertain the fact that the alleged detenue is major as on the date of her marriage, I have prepared Section

Alteration Memo and submitted to the concerned Magistrate on 28.09.2021 changing the section of law from Section 363 IPC to the head ‘woman

missing’. The said Section Alteration Memo is filed herewith for the kind perusal of the Hon’ble Court.

In view of the above, there is no basis for the allegation that though the complaint was given on 21.05.2021, the FIR was registered only on

5.6.2021. As evident from the contents of FIR, the complaint was given only on 5.6.2021 and not on 21.05.2021 as alleged by the petitioner herein. As

both of them are majors as on the date of marriage, the question of illegal detention of the alleged detenue by the 4th respondent does not arise.â€​

This court vide order dated 2.11.2021 directed the Superintendent of Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad to constitute a Medical Board and

conduct ossification test on Ms. Adepu Srinidi to determine her age and submit report.

Accordingly one Dr.B.Nagendar, s/o late Shankaraiah, aged 59 years, working as Superintendent, Osmania General Hospital, Afzalgunj,

Hyderabad, who was impleaded as 5th respondent in W.P.No.13249 of 2021, filed medical report of ossification test conducted on Ms. Adepu

Srinidhi.

Heard Smt. D.Nageswari learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.No.13249 of 2021 and Sri P.Rama Sharna Sharma, learned counsel for the

petitioner in W.P.No.21962 of 2021 and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for learned Additional Advocate General.

The above facts are noted to know the background of the case. At the cost of repetition, the allegation of the petitioner in W.P.No.21962 of 2021

is that her daughter is a minor as on the date of her marriage with the petitioner in W.P.No.13249 of 2021, and further he apprehends threat to her life

at the hands of the petitioner in W.P.No.13249 of 2021, and that she is under illegal detention. On other hand, the allegation of the petitioner in

WP.No.13249 of 2021, is that the father of his wife, and his brother (i.e., paternal uncle of his wife), are harassing their family members, as the

marriage was against their wish.

To consider the above allegations of both the parties, it is necessary to note the averments made in the counter affidavit filed by the 2nd

respondent in W.P.No.13249 of 2021, who is the investigating officer in this case. The said averments made in the counter affidavit are already

extracted above, which are to the effect that the Investigating Officer obtained the date of birth certificate from the Head Master, Vignan High

School, Inugurthy, where the alleged detenue studied, and found that it is ‘24.11.2002’ and that as on the date of marriage i.e., 22.05.2021 she

was a major, and as both of them are majors as on the date of their marriage, question of illegal detention of the alleged detenue by the 4th respondent

does not arise.

The 5th respondent in W.P.No.13249 of 2021 filed Medical Certificate given by Regional Medical Board, Osmania General Hospital is filed. The

same reads as under:

“We the members of the Regional Medical Board have carefully examined Ms. Adepu Srinidhi, referred by the Hon’ble High Court for the

State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

We are of the opinion that “As per the opinion of Professor & HOD of Forensic Medicine, OMC, Her age is about 17 years but below 18 years

(SEVENTEEN YEARS BUT BELOW EIGHTEEN YEARS).â€​

Marks of identification:

A black mole present on left cheek.

A black mole present at the medial side of left forearm.

Date of Medical Board:15-12-2021â€​

As per the ossification test, the Medical Board, which examined the alleged detenue, found that she is ‘about 17 years, but below 18 years’

as on 15.12.2021. But in the present case, there are school records. The Investigating Officer obtained birth certificate from the school authorities, and

also the SSC memo during the course of investigation, which clearly shows that her date of birth is 24.11.2002 i.e., as on the date of her marriage, she

was a major. Since admittedly alleged detenue is major as on today as per petitioners in both the cases, and more-so, the issue whether alleged

detenue is a major or not as on the date of marriage, is not required to be considered in these writ petitions.

On 03.01.2021 Ms. Adepu Srinidhi, is present before this court, and on being interacted, she stated that she married Gade Sandeep Kumar

(petitioner in W.P.No.13249 of 2021), on 22.05.2021 at Arya Samaj situated at Hasmparthy, Warangal District Urban out of her free will and consent,

and their marriage was a love marriage, that she was a major as on the date of marriage, her date of birth being 24.11.2002, and she is living with her

husband, and there is no threat to her life.

The father of the girl i.e., the petitioner in W.P.No.21962 of 2021 is also present, and on being questioned by this court he stated that he never

harassed the petitioner in W.P.No.13249 of 2021, nor their family members, and this his concern is about her daughter, who is of tender age, and that

he never interfered with the life of his daughter and her husband, and that in future also he will not interfere in their affairs and he also has not

disputed that as on today his daughter (alleged detenue) is major.

In view of the facts and circumstances, as the alleged detenue â€" Ms. Adepu Srinidhi, is living with her husband, it cannot be said that she is

under illegal detention, and hence W.P.No.21962 of 2021 is dismissed.

Coming to W.P.No.13249 of 2021, in view of the statement made by the 3rd respondent before this court, no orders are required to be passed in

this writ petition, and the same is accordingly closed.

However, it is needless to observe that in case the parties are still aggrieved, they are at liberty to work out their remedies in accordance with law.

Interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. No order as to costs.