IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWELVETH DAY OF AUGUST 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 Nos.15656 and 16651 of 2008 W.P.No.15656 of 2008 : Between: G. Sridhar Rao, H.No. 7-1-6-8, Parameshwari Jewellers, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Station House Officer, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District. 2 The Superintendent of Police, Nizamabad District. .....RESPONDENT(S) For the reasons stated in the "Fax Message" dated 18-07-2008 sent by the Petitioner herein, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an Order, direction, or a Writ, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the Respondents herein to produce the Petitioner's father namely Garipally Rajesham, S/o. Garepally Sirsilam, before this Hon'ble Court, who was arrested on 17-07-2008 at about 01.30 P.M. by Sub-Inspector of Police and four constable, Devampally, Kamareddy and apprehending danger to his life and set him at liberty forthwith and to pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner : FAX MESSAGE Counsel for the Respondents : THE ADVOCATE GENERAL W.P.No.16651 of 2008: Between: G. Sridhar Rao, S/o. G. Rajesham, Parameshwari Jewellars, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Station House Officer, Devanpally, Nizamabad District. 2 The Superintendent of Police, Nizamabad. .....RESPONDENT(S) For the reasons stated in the "Fax Message" dated 28-07-2008 sent by the Petitioner herein, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an Order, direction, or a Writ, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the Respondents herein to produce the father of the Petitioner namely G. Rajesham, R/o. Kamareddy, Nizamabad District before this Hon'ble Court, who was illegally detained by the Sub Inspector of Police, Devanpally on 17-07-2008 apprehending danger to his life and set him at liberty forthwith and to pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner : FAX MESSAGE Counsel for the Respondents : THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU TAKEN UP W.P.Nos.15656 and 16651 of 2008 ORAL COMMON ORDER : (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice K.C.Bhanu) Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader, representing the learned Advocate General, appearing for the respondents. 2. These writ petitions are taken up at the instance of the petitioner’s Fax Messages, dated 18-07-2008 and 28-07-2008, wherein it is alleged that his father viz., Garipally Rajesham, son of Garepally Sirsilam, was illegally detained by the Sub-Inspector of Police and four Constables of Devanpally, Kamareddy, on 17-07-2008 and that he is apprehending danger to his life and set him at liberty, forthwith. 3. A common counter affidavit has been filed by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Devanpally Police Station, Nizamabad District, representing the first respondent herein, stating that in connection with Crime No.74 of 2008 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 457 and 380 of Indian Penal Code of Devanpally Police Station, the alleged detenu was called to the Police Station on 17-07-2008 and thereafter he was let off on the same day and is now moving freely attending to his day-to-day business. His statement was also recorded by the Mandal Executive Magistrate, Kamareddy Mandal, on 04-08-2008, wherein he stated that he was called to the Police Station on 17-07-2008 in connection with the investigation of a case and let off on the same day. The said statement of the alleged detenu is made part of the record. 4. In view of the categorical statement made by the first respondent, it is clear that the alleged detenu was not illegally or wrongfully detained and he is now moving freely. Therefore, the question of issuing Writ of Habeas Corpus does not arise. 5. For the foregoing, we see no grounds in the writ petitions and the same are liable to be dismissed. 6. Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed, at the stage of admission. However, there shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA _______________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 12-08-2008 Msr. ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Station House Officer, Kamareddy, Nizamabad District. 2 The Superintendent of Police, Nizamabad District. 3. 2 CCs to the Advocate General, Government of Andhra Pradesh, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT). 4. 2 CD copies THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU Taken up W.P.Nos.15656 and 16651 of 2008 12-08-2008 (Msr)