IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 5961 of 2008 Between: A.Jayalaxmi W/o A.Thimma Reddy, Housewife, R/o 2/21, Nethaji Nagar, Parvathinagar, Bellary, Karnataka State. ..... PETITIONER AND 1.The Superintendent of Police, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Adoni Division, Kurnool Dist. 3.The Station House Officer, Maddikera Police Station, Kurnool Dist. 4.Arikera Hanumantha Reddy S/o A. Thimma Reddy, R/o.Chaitanya Educational Society, Maddikera, Kurnool District. 5.Arikera Venkatalaxmi W/o. A.Hanumantha Reddy, Maddikera Mandal,R/o.Chaitanya Educational Society, Maddikera, Kurnool District. 6.A.Satyanarayana Reddy S/o A. hanumantha Reddy R/o. Z.P. Boys School, Maddikera, Kurnool District. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents police to produce A. Thimma Reddy S/o Hanumantha Reddy aged about 40 years R/o Maddikera, Kurnool District, before the Hon'ble Court, in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.V.RAGHU VEER Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4&5: MR. RESU MAHENDAR REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER (PER HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY) Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner-A.Jayalaxmi, wife of A.Thimma Reddy, filed this writ of Habeas Corpus stating that her marriage with the alleged detenu- A.Thimma Reddy was performed on 25.04.1993 and out of the wedlock they were blessed with a son-Viswa Bhargava Reddy and they lived happily at Maddikera for eight years. Later they shifted to Hyderabad and stayed for three years, and 5th respondent (mother-in- law of the petitioner) joined them in the year 2003. While staying at Hyderabad, 6th respondent, brother of her husband, visited their house and informed that her father-in-law is not well and wanted to take her husband to Maddikera, their native place, and accordingly, 6th respondent and her husband went to Maddikera. Twenty days thereafter 5th respondent stated that the health of 4th respondent has not improved and took her and her son also to Maddikera. Her husband was not available in the house at Maddikera and when she questioned, respondents 4 and 6 stated that if she brings Rs.8.00 lakhs from her parents’ house they will disclose the whereabouts of her husband and that she was harassed physically and mentally by the respondents 4 and 6 on that score. Respondents 4 to 6 were aware of the whereabouts of her husband, but they were not informing the whereabouts of her husband for the last five years. Hence, she lodged a complaint with the 3rd respondent to take action, which was registered as a case in Crime No.70 of 2007 for ‘man missing’ on 26.12.2007 and since then the investigation has not been completed and she apprehends danger to the life of her husband and he might have already been killed by respondents 4 and 6 and therefore, the police may be directed to complete the investigation. Complaining the inaction on the part of the police in completing the investigation, the above writ petition is filed. 2. 3rd respondent-Sub Inspector of Police, Maddikera Police Station, filed counter-affidavit stating that on registering the crime under ‘man missing’ they took-up investigation and during the course of investigation they examined the complainant, and father of the alleged detenu and their statements were recorded and also summoned respondents 5 and 6. On enquiry, it came to light that the detenu got a job in railways and hence, he shifted to Hyderabad from Maddikera and residing in Hyderabad since 2001. After completion of the training, he took his family to Hyderabad and resided there with his wife and son. The property possessed by the joint family was divided by the father of the alleged detenu and 18 acres of land was given to the alleged detenu towards his share. The father of the alleged detenu learnt that the alleged detenu raised loans of about Rs.8.00 lakhs from the people in and around Maddikera and cheated them by not paying the same. Vexed with the debtors visiting their house, 4th respondent sent 6th respondent on 31.03.2004 to call the alleged detenu from Hyderabad to settle the issue and on that the 6th respondent, who being the eldest son of the 4th respondent, went to Hyderabad to bring the alleged detenu, where he learnt that he is out of station and returned back to Maddikera and informed the same to his father, who is the 4th respondent herein. The alleged detenu along with his family visited Mandagiri Eshwara Temple situated at Pattikonda on 04.04.2004 and informed the same to them. 4th respondent approached the alleged detenu at the temple and questioned him about his activities, where he informed them not to interfere in his personal matters. Later the alleged detenu sent his mother, who was staying with him at Hyderabad along with his wife and son to Maddikera in the month of April, 2004 and since then the petitioner along with her son resided in her in-laws house at Maddikera till 2006. The investigation also further reveal that the alleged detenu who raised loans from one P.Susheelamma, wife of Linga Reddy, resident of Maddikera and for recovery of the same, she filed O.S.No.4 of 2005 wherein an ex parte decree was obtained by her and in execution of the ex parte decree, she filed E.P.No.13 of 2005 for sale of 14 acres of land, which was the share of alleged detenu and the same was auctioned by the Court on 13.03.2006 for a sum of Rs.1,32,000/- and various steps taken by the Investigating Officer reveal that one Gangireddy Lakshminarayana Reddy, resident of Veldanda village, also gave an amount of Rs.90,000/- to the alleged detenu for securing a job in Railway Department. On coming to know that the alleged detenu is coming to Hyderabad on 26.08.2005, he laid a watch at IVRCL Company, Vijayanagar Colony, Hyderabad and caught the alleged detenu and brought him to Pattikonda and got registered land to an extent of Ac.3.60 cents, which belongs to the alleged detenu, on 27.08.2005, in the name of Gangireddy Lakshminarayana Reddy at Pattikonda Sub-Registrar’s office. The investigation further reveals that when he tried to secure the presence of one Goverdhan Reddy @ Gopi, who is the friend of the alleged detenu, in order to know the present whereabouts of the alleged detenu, he learnt that the said Govardhan Reddy is out of station and when he contacted the said Govardhan Reddy on telephone, he informed that the alleged detenu was not in contact with him since the date of his leaving. Investigation further revealed that the alleged detenu requested his in-laws to give some amount on credit basis in order to clear the debts by keeping his land with them and on refusal of the said proposal and as there was no financial help from his in-laws and his family, he left them as there was heavy pressure from the creditors. On registering the crime, they put all efforts to find out the alleged detenu. 3. Respondents 4 and 5 filed counter-affidavit stating that 4th respondent distributed the entire agricultural lands at his village admeasuring Ac.36.00 acres equally to his sons under a partition deed and out of which the alleged detenu got the land of Ac.18.00 which was mutated in the revenue records. Having noticed the financial crisis of the alleged detenu, they rushed to Hyderabad to see the petitioner and the alleged detenu. Thereafter, the alleged detenu informed the 6th respondent to give shelter for his wife and son in April, 2003 on the pretext that he is going to Bombay for securing a job or other source of income. Thus, 6th respondent took care of the petitioner and her son out of affection towards the family of the petitioner and that the petitioner lived with them till 2005. It is further stated that she herself left the house of the 6th respondent and lodged a complaint with the 3rd respondent and that he denied that they illegally detained the alleged detenu and the 4th respondent who is aged about 83 years, and his wife is aged about 80 years and having no demands and wanted to live peacefully and at that old age they are awaiting for a peaceful end of their lives without any social obligations. To have a peaceful life only they have equally distributed the property to both sons. 4. In view of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents 4 and 5 and the counter-affidavit filed by the 3rd respondent, which also discloses that all efforts are being made to trace out the alleged detenu and also discloses that the alleged detenu suffered heavy debts and to escape from the creditors he left the fate of the petitioner and his son to others and is hiding. In view of the same, concerned police are directed to complete the investigation in the crime, registered on the complaint lodged by the petitioner, and file a final report within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order after giving due intimation to the petitioner. 5. With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. _______________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J. ______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J. Date:15th April, 2008 Tnb/cs ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.The Superintendent of Police, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Adoni Division, Kurnool Dist. 3.The Station House Officer, Maddikera Police Station, Kurnool Dist. 4. 2CCs to the Government Pleader for Home, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. (OUT) 5.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT}