IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION No.17412 of 2009 Between: P.Vani. … Petitioner And 1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Nellore District. 3. The Station House Officer, Kavali (Rural) Police Station, Kavali Post & Mandal, Nellore District 4. The Station House Officer, Gajuvaka Police Station, Visakhapatnam. … Respondents The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION No.17412 of 2009 ORAL ORDER: - (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned Assistant Government Pleader, representing the learned Advocate General, appearing for respondents 1 to 4. 2. The grievance of the petitioner, in this writ petition, is that, on 12.08.2009, her son viz., P.Naresh, was illegally detained by the Station House Officer, Kavali, Rural Police Station, Nellore District, i.e., the 3rd respondent. 3. The 3rd respondent – Sub-Inspector of Police, Kavali Rural Police Station, Nellore District, filed counter-affidavit contending inter alia that the alleged detenu was not required by the Kavali Police Station at all. He also denied that the petitioner has approached the 3rd respondent to know the whereabouts of the alleged detenu and that the allegation leveled by the petitioner that, on 12.08.2009, the Police, Kavali Police Station, apprehended the alleged detenu and was neither released nor the whereabouts were made known to the petitioner. It is equally false to allege that the police, Kavali Police Station, informed the petitioner that the alleged detenu was handed over to the Police at Visakhapatnam. 4. The 4th respondent – Inspector of Police, Gajuwaka Police Station, Visakhapatnam, filed counter-affidavit contending inter alia that the investigation reveals that the alleged detenu was taken into custody by the police of Paravada, Visakhapatnam, on the intervening night of 18/19.08.2009, in connection with Crime No.149 of 2009, registered under Section 41 Cr.P.C., and he was produced before the Tahsildar-cum-Mandal Executive Magistrate, Paravada, on 19.08.2009, at 10.00 a.m., upon which the Mandal Executive Magistrate, Paravada, released him on the same day, by ordering him to enter into a bond, to keep peace and good behaviour for a period of six months. The other facts, which lead to the arrest of the alleged detenu, are also explained in the said counter-affidavit, which are not very necessary to be mentioned. 5. From the record made available to this Court, it appears that, on 19.08.2009, the alleged detenu had executed a bond before the Tahsildar-cum-Mandal Executive Magistrate, Paravada, Visakhapatnam, and the same was signed by him. It shows that the execution of bond, by the alleged detenu, was made under Section 240 of the Cr.P.C., in crime No.149 of 2009. 6. We have no doubt to disbelieve the records maintained by the Mandal Executive Magistrate, in his official capacity as a Magistrate. These are the proceedings initiated as per law. Therefore, there is absolutely no reason to doubt the said proceedings. 7. From the above, it appears that, on 19.08.2009, the alleged detenu was released, upon furnishing a bond to maintain peace and good behaviour. 8. Therefore, in our view, the allegations leveled by the petitioner against the respondents are totally false. We cannot appreciate this kind of conduct from a citizen. 9. For the foregoing reasons, the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 10. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed, at the stage of admission. However, there shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA __________________________ JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO 28th August 2009 LMV