HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. ESWARAIAH AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI W.P. Nos. 2233 and 3856 of 2011 DATED: 21.02.2011 W.P. No. 2233 of 2011: Between: Tammisetti Sitamma .. Petitioner And 1. Station House Officer 2. The Superintendent of Police 3. Station House Officer 4. Commissioner of Police .. Respondents W.P. No. 3856 of 2011: Between: Garengula Ramana, W/o.G.Ramakrishna .. Petitioner And 1. Station House Officer, Vijawada 2. The Station House Officer, P.S. Guntur 3. Superintendent of Police 4. Station House Officer, Payakarapuram 5. The Commissioner of Police .. Respondents COMMON ORDER:- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice V. Eswaraiah) Inasmuch as these two writ petitions are inter-related, they are taken up together for disposal by this common order. While W.P. No.2233 of 2011 is filed by the grand mother of the 1st detenue seeking a direction to the official respondents to produce detenue Nos.1 and 2, W.P. No.3856 of 2011 is filed by the 1st detenue seeking a direction to the official respondents to produce the 2nd detenue, who is her husband, and set them free. The main grievance of the petitioner in W.P.No.2233 of 2011 is that in the intervening night of 01.02.2011 at about 01:30 a.m., respondent Nos.1 and 2 came to the house of the detenues and forcibly took them without assigning any reason. The petitioner-1st detenue in W.P. No.3856 of 2011 submits that she is a physically disabled woman and the detenue in this case is her husband. In the intervening night of 01.02.2011, at about 01:30 a.m., the police of Guntur and other policemen came to her house and forcibly took them to an unknown place. They also took away 20 tolas of gold consisting of Nallapusal Golusu, two chains, two rings, neckles, two rings poosalgundu, danda, etc. and cash of Rs.50,000/-. One of the policemen tortured them by beating on her legs and hands with tubes and sticks demanding her to pay Rs.2,00,000/- and also beat her husband severely, and the petitioner-1st detenue was forced to draw Rs.45,000/- from the bank and they snatched the money from her and took her to her sister’s house and set her free by taking an undertaking from her sister that the petitioner shall be produced before them again with Rs.1,00,000/- and they also posed a threat to the 1st detenue with dire consequences to withdraw this writ petition. The 2nd respondent-Station House Officer, Guntur in W.P. No. 3856 of 2011 stating that one Panuganti Nageswara Rao approached the Station House Officer of Penamaluru Police Station, Vijayawada, on 10.01.2011, at about 8.00 p.m. and lodged a complaint stating that he is a resident of D.No.20-79, Kanuru village, Penamuluru Mandal, Vijayawada, and on 28.12.2010, after locking the door of his house, he went to Vijayawada on personal work. After returning home on 10.01.2011, he found the lock of the door broke open and some unknown offenders committed theft of gold and silver ornaments worth Rs.25,000/-. Based on the complaint, a case was registered as Cr.No.10/2011 under Sections 457 and 380 IPC. During the course of investigation, on 12.02.2011, the Police, Penamaluru saw one person moving under suspicious circumstances with a hand bag in his hand at Head Post Office, Vijayawada I-Town Area, then he immediately stopped him. On being enquired about him, he disclosed his name as Gerengula Ramakrishna, S/o.Pitchaiah, the alleged detenue in this writ petition, and confessed to have committed the above offence and six other crimes. Then, he was taken into custody and brought to the police station. The alleged detenue is accused No.1 in one of the crimes. After complying with the formalities of arrest, the alleged detenu was produced before I Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada on 13.02.2011. In pursuance of the order of remand, the alleged detenu is lodged at District Jail, Vijayawada. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material placed on record. Having regard to the averments made in the counter affidavit, we are of the opinion that certain disputed questions of fact are involved in both the writ petitions. As per the counter, the 1st detenue, who is the petitioner in W.P.No.3856 of 2011 was not at all detained. In connection with the crime No.10 of 2011 the alleged detenue in W.P. No. 3856 was produced before the learned I Metropolitan Magistrate, who remanded him to judicial custody. Therefore, it cannot be said that the detention of the alleged 2nd detenu is illegal. Neither of the petitioners lodged any complaint earlier. If really the petitioners have made any complaints, and the police have not taken necessary action nor their complaints are taken up by higher officials, it is always left open to the petitioners to file a private complaint before the competent Court of criminal jurisdiction for appropriate remedy. Hence, we do not see any merits in these writ petitions, and the same are accordingly, dismissed. No order as to costs. ________________ V. ESWARAIAH, J 21st February, 2011 ______________ NOUSHAD ALI, J bcj