IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO : 11287 of 2009 Between: Nazmun Nisha W/o. S. Dayeed Vazir, CRPF Head Constable (Driver) Quarter No.Type-II, Block 7-F No. 99 RAF/CRPF Quarters, Hakimpet, Secunderabad-500 078. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Government of India, rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, South Block, New Delhi-110 001. 2 The Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Secretary Home Department (through P.S. Alwal), A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad. 3 The Inspector General of Police, CRPF Southern Sector, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad-33. 4 The Commandant, 99 RAF/CRPF, Ranga Reddy, Hakimpet, Secunderabad 500 087, A.P. 5 Kamlesh, Sub Inspctor (Steno) 99 RAF/CRPF, Hakimpet, Secunderabad, A.P. .....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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the 4th respondent herein to produce the petitioner's husband Head Constable Sayeed Wazir before this Hon'ble Court and consequently shall be set at liberty with immediately effect from the unlawful, illegal, wrongful and unjustifiable detention of the 4th respondent and allow him to move freely like other CRPF Personnel and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.NARINDER PAL SINGH Counsel for the Respondent No.: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following : Oral Order: (per D.S.R.Varma, J.) Heard Sri Narinder Pal Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri A.Rajasekhara Reddy, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents. 2. At the outset, we have to say that the present writ petition is totally frivolous and misconceived, and nothing short of abuse of process of the Court. 3. The allegation in the writ petition is that the daughter of respondent No.5 and the son of the petitioner were studying in C.R.P.F. Public School, Hakimpet and respondent No.5 had filed a false and fabricated complaint against the husband of the petitioner with respondent No.4 stating that her son had kidnapped his daughter, by name Miss Namnitta Rani and further that respondent No.5 is trying to implicate her husband and son in a false case of kidnap. 4. In response to the writ petition, a counter-affidavit has been filed by respondent No.4, who is the Commandant in C.R.P.F., Hakimpet, Secunderabad. It was stated that respondent No.5 was Sub Inspector (Steno). While respondent No.5 was on leave and went to a tour along with his family members, at that time, his daughter, by name Miss Namita, was found missing on 06-6-2009 from Secunderabad Railway Station and that respondent No.5 had a doubt that the son of the petitioner had kidnapped his daughter and made a complaint in that regard. It also appears that both the parties were advised to settle their personal grudges keeping in view the welfare of their children. The petitioner and her husband have been residing in family quarter provided by the Department and moving freely in the campus. The said fact is not in dispute. It has been further stated in the counter-affidavit that the Police have traced the daughter of respondent No.5 on 09-6-2009 and handed over to respondent No.5. That also is not disputed by the petitioner in any manner. 5. The cumulative effect of these events, as could be seen from the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and counter- affidavit, is that the apprehension of the petitioner that her husband and son would be implicated in a false case is found to be totally untrue, inasmuch as her husband was stated to be found freely moving and attending his day-to-day duties; Nextly, the daughter of respondent No.5, who was found missing w.e.f. 06-6-2009, was also traced by the Police on 09-6-2009 and was handed over to respondent No.5. Therefore, as of now, there is no one in prison. If at all there is any grievance, the grievance could be to respondent No.5 but not to the petitioner. Neither the petitioner’s husband nor her son were ever arrested by anybody nor were in the illegal custody of respondent No.4 or the Police. 6. In view of the matter, since nobody was illegally detained either by the Police or anybody or in fact, in the custody of anyone, the question of issuance of a writ of habeas corpus does not arise. The writ petition is totally misleading and devoid of any merit. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, at the stage of admission. ____________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA ____________________ JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO 30th June, 2009. Ak ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1) 2 CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{MSN}