Case Note & Summary
The matter arose from a letter petition sent by Vasabhaktula Swathi to the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, which was registered as a taken-up writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner described herself as the wife of Tanuku Ravi Kumar and the mother of two minor sons, Tanuku Charan and Tanuku Dansuh Vahin. She alleged that her husband had become involved in a criminal proceeding registered by Rajamahendravaram CID Police as Crime No.22 of 2024. According to her, the husband fled to abscond and escape investigation, and in doing so he unlawfully and forcibly removed both minor children from her lawful care and custody. The petitioner stated that the whereabouts of her husband and the children were completely unknown and expressed grave apprehension regarding the safety and welfare of the children while they were in the custody of an absconding individual. She prayed for a writ of habeas corpus directing the police authorities to trace and produce the children before the court and restore their lawful custody to her as their mother and natural guardian. On 23.07.2026, the bench passed an order recording the submissions made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 4. Based on written instructions from the Station House Officer, Prakash Nagar Police Station, the AGP informed the court that the husband, Ravi Kumar Tanuku, had earlier filed Criminal Petition No.9564 of 2025 along with another accused before the High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking quashing of FIR No.175 of 2025 registered at WPS-IT Corridor, Cyberabad. The present petitioner was impleaded as respondent No.3 in that criminal petition. The court noted that Crl.P.No.9564 of 2025 was allowed on 18.09.2025 and the proceedings against the accused were quashed. The court further noted the existence of a Memorandum of Understanding dated 26.03.2025 between the present petitioner and her husband, which provided for divorce by mutual consent, payment of Rs.10,00,000 in full and final settlement, monthly maintenance of Rs.30,000 for twelve months, waiver of property claims, and sole custody of the children with the husband. The order reproduced the terms of the MoU in detail. The core legal issues raised by the petitioner's letter were whether a writ of habeas corpus should be issued to trace and produce the minor children and whether the prior criminal quashing and the MoU affected the custody claim. No final decision on these issues appears in the extracted text; the available portions record the petitioner's allegations, the initiation of the taken-up writ petition, the prior criminal proceedings, and the terms of the MoU. The matter was listed before the Division Bench and heard on 28.07.2026, but the extract ends without recording a final order or directions on the habeas corpus prayer. Consequently, the final outcome of the writ petition is not available from the text provided.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Habeas Corpus - Custody and Production of Minor Children - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 226 - The petitioner-mother alleged that her husband, while absconding in a criminal case, forcibly removed their two minor children from her lawful custody, and her letter was registered as a taken-up writ petition seeking tracing and production of the children. The court took cognizance and recorded the prayer for habeas corpus but no final direction is available in the extracted text. (Paras 1-3) B) Criminal Procedure - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings - Effect on Habeas Corpus Custody Claim - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 528 - The court noted that the husband had earlier obtained quashing of FIR No.175 of 2025 in Crl.P.No.9564 of 2025, and that a memorandum of understanding dated 26.03.2025 between the parties provided for financial settlement and sole child custody with the husband. The court reproduced the MoU terms but did not give a final ruling on whether the quashing or MoU barred the mother's habeas corpus claim. (Para 4) C) Family Law - Child Custody - Memorandum of Understanding Between Spouses - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 498A (mentioned in MoU) - The MoU recorded that the parties agreed to mutual consent divorce, payment of Rs.10,00,000 and monthly maintenance, waiver of claims, and that the wife would not initiate cases under Section 498A IPC or the Domestic Violence Act or for maintenance. This was noted as relevant background, but its legal enforceability in a child custody habeas corpus proceeding was not determined in the extracted text. (Para 4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ of habeas corpus should be issued to trace and produce the minor children and restore their custody to the petitioner-mother; and what is the effect of the prior quashing of criminal proceedings in Crl.P.No.9564 of 2025 and the Memorandum of Understanding dated 26.03.2025 on the custody of the minor children.
Final Decision
Not mentioned in the extracted text; the court recorded the petitioner's letter, noted the prior criminal proceedings and MoU, and the matter remained pending further consideration.
