IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 22103 of 2008 Between: Mohd. Siraj, R/o. 20-7-401, Inside Fathe Darwaza, Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Inspector of Police, Task Force, Central Zone, Hyderabad. 2 The Deputy Commissioner of Police, South Zone, Purana Haveli Hyderabad. 3 The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad. .....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 For the reasons stated in the "Telegram" dated 27-09-2008 sent by the Petitioner herein, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an Order, direction, or a Writ, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to call for the records and remarks from the Respondents herein in connection with harassment of the cousin of the Petitioner namely Fayyaz Ali Sohail, S/o. Mohd. Hassan, who was released on bail from Central Prison, Chanchalguda. The police of Personnel Task Force harassed the Petitioner and they illegally detained and tortured him till 26-09-2008; and this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass appropriate orders directing the concerned authorities to protect the Petitioner's cousin from police harassment in the interest of justice and to pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner:TELEGRAM Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU Writ Petition No.22103 of 2008 Order: (per K.C.Bhanu, J.) Heard the learned Assistant Government Pleader, representing the learned Government Pleader for Home, appearing for respondents 1 to 3. 2. Taken up writ petition basing on the telegram, dated 27-9-2008, sent by the petitioner herein alleging that his cousin, by name Fayyaz Ali Sohail, son of Mohammed Hassan, was wrongfully detained by the Task Force Police, Hyderabad and they harassed and tortured him till 26-9- 2008 and he seeks to protect the detenu from Police harassment. 3. In pursuance of the notices sent by this Court, a detailed counter-aﬃdavit has been ﬁled by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Commissioner’s Task Force, Hyderabad alleging that the cousin of the petitioner, by name Mohammed Fayyaz alias Sohail, was one of the accused in Crime No.72 of 2008 of Market Police Station for the oﬀences punishable under Sections 120-B, 379, 384 and 411 I.P.C., read with Section 25(1)(1-b) of Arms Act and Section 20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. The Police produced all the accused in the First Information Report including the detenu before the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad and later, they were remanded to judicial custody. 4. It was further alleged in the counter-affidavit that on 27-9-2008 at 8.30 a.m., while West Zone Task Force Team, headed by the Sub Inspector of Police were on patrolling duty near Jail Road at Monda Market, Secunderabad, they found the detenu while he was moving under suspicious circumstances and in possession of one sword, that the Task Force Police apprehended him and on interrogation, he confessed that on 22-9-2008 he was released on bail in the previous cases and again decided to commit oﬀences to earn money and purchased one sword and was carrying with him to commit oﬀences at the point of sword, that the Task Force Police of West Zone seized the sword from his possession and he was handed over to Market Police Station along with a report for taking necessary action and that accordingly, a case in Crime No.186 of 2008 of Market Police Station for the oﬀences punishable under Sections 25(I-B)(b) of Indian Arms Act, 1959 was registered against him. The Market Police of Hyderabad produced him before the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad on 27-9-2008. In pursuance of the judicial order, he was confined in judicial custody. 5. Since the cousin of the petitioner was detained in pursuance of the judicial order, the question of wrongful detention does not arise. 6. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed, at the stage of admission. ___________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA ___________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 20th October, 2008. Ak ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MJ}