Judgment :- M. Chockalingam, J. Invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court, one Mr.Suresh Kumar, Neelankarai, Chennai, has brought forth this application alleging that the marriage with the alleged detenue took place on 5.3.2007. After the marriage, both of them went to United States in view of their employment. They came back to India and participated in a family function. Thereafter, she was taken by the third respondent, her mother. When the petitioner made attempt to meet her, she prevented. Under such circumstances, the petitioner apprehends that his wife is in illegally custody of her parents. Hence, he gave a complaint to the police and the same was also registered. But she was not produced. Hence, this petition before this Court. 2. In answer to the above, it is contended by the first respondent that on the complaint of the petitioner, a case was registered in Crime No.309/2009 and the same is pending investigation. According to the counsel for the second and third respondents, originally, the petitioner and the alleged detenue were employed in United States and subsequently, both of them returned to India. They had strained relationship. The alleged detenue has left to United States in view of her employment and she is now in United States. E-Mail and fax message were sent by her to the Inspector of Police, Neelankarai stating that she is not in India and she does not want to live with the petitioner. The averment made by the petitioner that she was forcible taken or kept under illegal custody of the 2nd and 3rd respondents is false. Hence, the petition has got to be dismissed. 3. After hearing both sides, it is quite clear that the marriage between the petitioner and the alleged detenue has taken place in the year 2007 and they were living peacefully in United States in view of their employment. They came back to India and thereafter, she was living with the 2nd and 3rd respondents, who are her parents and now, she left to United States. As on today, she is in United States and she had sent E-mail and fax message. Now, it is clear that the allegation made as if she is in illegal custody of the 2nd and 3rd respondent cannot be accepted. As on today, she is in United States and she had sent E-mail and fax message. Now, it is clear that the allegation made as if she is in illegal custody of the 2nd and 3rd respondent cannot be accepted. If the petitioner has got any grievance, he has to work out his remedy before the appropriate forum and not by invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore, the Habeas Corpus Petition is dismissed. 4. A copy of the E-mail and fax message sent by the alleged detenue to the Inspector of Police, Neelankarai, were produced before the Court and the counsel for the petitioner requested that a copy of the said E-mail and fax message may be given to him. There is no impediment in giving him a copy of the same. The petitioner shall apply for the copy of the said E-mail and Fax message before the Registry, following the proper procedure.