HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.KRISHNA MOHAN REDDY W.P. NO. 16572 OF 2011 Tuesday, the Twenty Seventh day of September, Two Thousand and Eleven Between D.Tata Rao Petitioner AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others Respondents THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) The petitioner who is the father of the alleged detenu D.Rajasekhar, filed this writ of habeas corpus for the production of D.Rajasekhar, who is said to have been illegally detained since 11.6.2011 without registering any crime and without producing him before the concerned Magistrate. It is stated that the petitioner has purchased land to an extent of 220 Sq. Yards in Sy. No. 39, situated at Shivajipalem, Visakhapatnam, vide registered document No.3971 of 1975 while the fifth respondent has purchased land in Sy.No.47/2 of Shivajipalem, which is adjacent to his land. It is further stated that the fifth respondent has encroached 25 feet into the open space of the petitioner and in that connection, he also filed a civil suit and obtained injunction and the same is pending between the parties. It is further stated that the fifth respondent is a practicing advocate and his wife is working as Junior Civil Judge, Srikakulam and taking advantage of the position of his wife, the fifth respondent is said to have filed a complaint and influenced the police and got taken away his son without any justification. The Sub-Inspector of Police, III Town Police Station, Visakhapatnam, the fourth respondent herein has filed counter stating that in fact the fifth respondent filed a complaint against the petitioner and others, pursuant to which a case in Cr. No.280 of 2011 was registered for the offences punishable under Sec. 448, 427, 506, 120-B read with Sec. 34 IPC and Sec. 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act on 17.5.2011, in which the petitioner’s son is the accused No.1 and in that connection, he was apprehended on 16.6.2011 and produced before the learned IV Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam, and on remand he was lodged at Central Prison, Visakhapatnam. The allegation that he was illegally detained from 11.6.2011 is denied. It is stated that the alleged detenu was apprehended on 16.6.2011 and he was produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate on the same day. In view of these revelations, we are not inclined to express any opinion with regard to the civil disputes among the parties. If a complaint filed before the police discloses commission of a cognizable offence following which the arrest was made, it cannot be said that the police illegally registered the case and that he was erroneously apprehended. If the petitioner was arrested prior to 16.6.2011 and was in illegal custody, he could have reported the same to the Magistrate for conducting necessary enquiry. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, as the alleged detenu was already arrested and produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate and in view of the criminal case, it cannot be said, prima facie that he has been detained illegally thereby the question of producing him before this court does not arise. Therefore, the writ petition is closed with a liberty to the petitioner to take appropriate action in accordance with law, if permitted. No order as to costs. ___________________ Justice V.Eswaraiah ______________________________ Justice G.Krishna Mohan Reddy September 27, 2011 MAS