Judgment :- M.CHOCKALINGAM, J. Invoking the Writ jurisdiction of this Court, the petitioner, namely, Dhanapal, has filed this petition for issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus, for production of his daughter, namely, Saranya, aged about 20 years. 2. The affidavit filed in support of the petition is perused. The Court heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 3. On the last hearing when the matter was taken up for enquiry, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the detenue has got married already and hence, the matter was directed to be posted to 212. 2009 for production of the detenue before this Court and the petitioner was also directed to appear before this Court. Accordingly, the detenue is produced before the Court today. The petitioner is also present. 4. The case of the petitioner is that the detenue Saranya, aged about 20 years, is his daughter; that on 012. 2008 at about 8.00 PM near Pothiraj Street, Thiruvannamalai, his daughter was found missing while she was coming around the temple hill and he gave a complaint to the 1st respondent police on the next day i.e.on 012. 2009 that the 2nd respondent has kidnapped her; but even now, no steps have been taken and that under such circumstances, he was forced to file this hebeas corpus petition before this Court. 5. The said Saranya is enquired by the Court. According to her, she was born on 02.05.1989; she is a graduate; she has married the 2nd respondent on 012. 2009 in a temple at Teynampet, Madras and now she is living with him happily. She has further added that she was neither kidnapped nor kept under illegal custody and that she is not willing to go with the petitioner or the parents. 6. The 2nd respondent is also present in Court and according to him, he married the detenue as informed by her. 7. The petitioner, who is present in court, would submit that she has been kidnapped on 012. 2009 and the statements of the petitioner are not true. 8. After hearing the detenue Saranya, who is, as on today, aged about 20 years, it is clear that she is a graduate and she has married the 2nd respondent on 012. 2009 at Teynampet on her own volition and is also living with him. 2009 and the statements of the petitioner are not true. 8. After hearing the detenue Saranya, who is, as on today, aged about 20 years, it is clear that she is a graduate and she has married the 2nd respondent on 012. 2009 at Teynampet on her own volition and is also living with him. Under such circumstances, no question of any forcible taking or keeping her under illegal custody by the 2nd respondent, would arise. Accordingly, the habeas corpus petition is disposed of.