IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH 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 : 23298 of 2008 Between: Mrs. Archana Praveen W/o.Basetti Praveen Kumar, Hindu 84 A Kalina Village Santa Cruz East Mumbai-29 ..... PETITIONER AND 1.The State of Home Department rep. by its the Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Hyderabad 2.The Director General of Police Lakdikapool, Hyderabad 3.The Superintendent of Police Chittoor District, Chittoor Town, Andhra Pradesh 4.The Deputy Superintendent of Police Central Crime Station Thirupathi, Andhra Pradesh 5.The Station House Officer Central Crime Station Thirupathi, Andhra Pradesh .....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 issue a writ of Habeas Corpus or other appropriate order or direction in the nature of writ of declaring that the act of the Respondents by taking the husband of the petitioner into detention is illegal, carpious and void and against the principles of Natural justice and pass such other order or orders as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.GOPALA KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondents: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION NO : 23298 of 2008 ORDER: (per the HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU) This writ petition has been ﬁled to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus declaring the action of the respondents in taking the husband of the petitioner herein into detention as illegal and void. 2. In pursuance of the notice issued, a detailed counter-aﬃdavit has been ﬁled by the 5th respondent stating that the husband of the petitioner was arrayed as A1 in Cr.No.188 of 2008, under Sections 420 and 506 r/w 34 IPC. He was arrested on 23-10-2008 and produced before the concerned Magistrate. Thereafter, he was sent to judicial custody. 3. Though it is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the husband of the petitioner was taken long prior to the actual arrest as mentioned in the aﬃdavit, the same cannot be decided and determined by this Court because it is a question of fact. When the husband of the petitioner was in judicial custody, question of issuing Habeas Corpus does not arise and hence, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ---------------------------------- JUSTICE D.S.R. VARMA ------------------------------- JUSTICE K.C.BHANU DATED: 30-10-2008 Hsd