IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION NO : 23864 of 2001 Between: Rafiullah Khan, S/o. Azmathullah Khan, R/o. 9-2-70, Barkatpura, Nizamabad, Nizamabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 The Superintendent of Police, Nizamabad District, Nizamabad. 3 Mr. Ghousuddin, S/o. & age: not known to the Petitioner, II Town Police Station, Nizamabad, Nizamabad District. 4 Wahiuddin, S/o. & age: not known to the Petitioner, II Town Police Station, Barkatpura, Nizamabad, Nizamabad Dist. .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue an order or direction more especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 3 and 4 in detaining the petitioner on 6.11.2001 without assigning any reasons whatsoever and beating the petitioner to pulp without any authority as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to investigate into the matter relating to the detention and torture of the petitioner on 6.11.2001 and subsequent events resulting in serious impairment of the petitioner and take appropriate action against respondents 3 and 4 herein for the offences committed by them under sections 320, 325, 330 and other allied plrovisions of Indian Penal Code and further directing the respondents to pay a compensation of Rs.3 lakhs towards the medical expenses incurred by the petitioner in obtaining treatment for thegrievous injuries caused on his body by the respondents 3 and 4 and the other two unidentified policemen and also towards the mental agony, torture suffered by the petitioner apart from the damage done to the petitioner's image in the society on account of the incidents on 6.11.2001 and pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.SHARAT KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner questions the action of the respondents 3 and 4 who are the Circle Inspector of Police, II Town Police Station, Nizamabad and Sub- Inspector of Police, II Town Police Station, Barkatpura, Nizamabad for detaining him on 06.11.2001 without any reasons and without any offence committed by him. A counter has been filed by the respondents 1 and 2 stating that the petitioner is a native of Nizamabad District and he married one Asfia Husna and both of them stayed at Riyadh for some years and as his wife was convicted for adultery by the Islamic Court at Riyadh, the petitioner deserted her and came back to India and his wife filed a petition for custody of her children and the same was ordered accordingly. It is stated that on 27.05.1998 the wife of the petitioner filed a complaint before the II Town Police Station, Nizamabad stating that the petitioner harassed her for want of additional dowry and accordingly a case in Crime No.53 of 1998 for the offence under Section 498-A IPC was registered and charge sheet was also filed vide C.C.No.491 of 2000. It is stated that the petitioner married another lady Mohammadi Begum, but however, the petitioner compromised with his first wife and the case ended in acquittal. The second wife of the petitioner filed a petition before the A.P. State Legal Services Authority and the same was referred to the Station House Officer, II Town Police Station, Nizamabad for enquiry and report. During the course of enquiry on 06.11.2001 to give the particulars and address of his second wife, the petitioner said to have misbehaved with the police resulting exchange of talks and the petitioner was brought to the police station and based on the complaint given by the Sub- Inspector of Police, the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police registered a case in Crime No.66 of 2001 for the offence under Section 353 IPC against the petitioner and in that connection only, the petitioner was brought to the police station and on the complaint lodged by his second wife, another case in Crime No.81 of 2001 for the offence under Sections 498-A, 420, 406, 506 IPC was also registered by the II Town Police, Nizamabad against the petitioner and charge sheet was also filed vide C.C.No.738 of 2002. It is further stated that the petitioner has not questioned the registration of Crime Nos.66 of 2001 and 81 of 2001 and in that connection only, the petitioner said to have been taken to the police station. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled for any compensation for his alleged detention as he was brought to the police station during the course of enquiry on the complaint made by the Sub-Inspector of Police regarding misbehaving with the police officer. Further, as the petitioner has not questioned the registration of the crimes, it cannot be stated that the things happened during the course of enquiry on 06.11.2001 are illegal. Having regard to the facts of the case, I do not see any merits in the writ petition and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V.ESWARAIAH, J. Date:23.04.2008 Ccm To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BDLNM}