THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.6265 OF 2006 Dated: 3.4.2006 Between: The Managing Director, Proteck, Chennai. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Superintendent, Balanagar Police Station, Balanagar, Hyderabad and others. Respondents. HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO.6265 OF 2006 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is taken up on the basis of a telegram dated 21.3.2006. In this petition, petitioner alleges that Sri V. Prabhu, an employee of the petitioner-company has been illegally detained by a Police Constable of Balanagar Police Station on 20.3.2006. He is also apprehending danger to his life and therefore seeks appropriate directions to be issued to the respondents to set him at liberty forthwith. The respondents filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations made in the writ petition and stated that the alleged detenu was not taken into custody either on 20.3.2006 or on any other subsequent date. However, on 19.3.2006, the alleged detenu was called to the police station in connection with Crime No. 79 of 2006 registered under Sections 443,415,418 and 420 of I.P.C. read with Section 120(B) of I.P.C. and was asked to produce the papers pertaining to a purchase order placed by the complainant with the Accused No.1 in the said crime. The alleged detenu figured as A3 in the said case. The alleged detenu came to the police station again on 20.3.2006 and requested one week time to produce those papers. It is further stated that the case is still under investigation and unless the prima facie involvement of the alleged detenu is established in the case, he would not be apprehended in the case. However, on receipt of notice from the office of Advocate General, the respondents caused enquiries in the matter and found that the alleged detenu has been moving freely and has been attending to his day-to-day activities. They denied the allegation of illegal detention. In view of the averments made in the counter affidavit, no further orders are required to be passed in the writ petition and the writ petition is accordingly dismissed. ___________________ T. Meena Kumari,J Date: 3.4.2006 _____________ K.C. Bhanu,J pnb