HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.SURI APPA RAO WRIT PETITION NO. 2608 OF 2011 Tuesday, the Fifteenth day of February, Two Thousand and Eleven Between Smt. T.Visalakshamma Petitioner AND The Superintendent of Police, Ananthapur District and another Respondents THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) The petitioner, who is wife of the alleged detenu namely T.Viswanath, filed this writ of habeas corpus seeking his production before this court, alleging that he is illegally detained by the Station House Officer, I Town Police Station, Ananthapur. It is stated that her husband is doing small kirana business in Guntakal Town, Anantapur District. While so, it is stated that he was taken by the second respondent police on 3.2.2011, without registering any crime or when no case is pending against him, by forcibly entering into the house, abusing and beating her. It is stated that when her approaches to the respondents proved futile, she sent a telegram to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice of this court. It is stated that the police is blaming the alleged detenu that he has purchased stolen gold from third parties, though in fact he has not purchased such stolen gold from anybody at any point of time. The second respondent has filed counter denying the allegations that he has highhandedly entered into the house of the petitioner, abused them in filthy language on 3.2.2011. While denying the allegations, it is further stated that the CCS, Ananthapur and Gooty Police Station, suspecting the alleged detenue to be the receiver of the stolen properties pertaining to Crime Nos. 3 of 2011 Under Sec.454 and 380 IPC of Gooty Police Station and Cr. No. 186 of 2010 under Sec. 454, 380 IPC of Tadipatri Town Police Station, has called him, examined him on 9.2.2011 and let him off on the same day, as his involvement is yet to be established. It is also stated that the said police informed the alleged detenu that he would be called for further examination, if necessary. It is stated that the alleged detenue was called again on 4.2.2011 for examining him as to his complicity in the above crime, but instead of attending to the CCS, Anantapur, for examination, the petitioner instead of cooperating with the police, has sent telegram to this court and also filed the present writ petition alleging that her husband was illegally confined by the police. It is stated that the alleged detenue appeared on 9.2.2011 when he was called and he was examined and let off on the same day. In the background of these facts, we are of the opinion that there is no indication in the counter as to whether any procedure has been followed in summoning the alleged detenue. As the petitioner has not filed any complaint before any authority with regard to the alleged beatings or scolding in filthy language, it is not possible for this court to decide the said controversy. However, if the husband of the petitioner is required in connection with any of the crimes, without following the due process and without intimating him of his requirement, he cannot be called orally. Therefore, while directing the respondents to follow the procedure contemplated under law whenever the alleged detenue is required, we dismiss the writ petition. No order as to costs. ___________________ Justice V.Eswaraiah ________________________ Justice V.Suri Appa Rao February 15, 2011 MAS