IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D. APPA RAO TAKEN UP WRIT PETITION NO.6417 OF 2007 Dated : April 05, 2007 Between: Angadi Sanjeevamma Petitioner AND The Station House Officer, Lalapet Police Station, Guntur, Guntur, District and another Respondents THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.APPA RAO WRIT PETITION NO.6417 OF 2007 ORAL ORDER: (per THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA) Heard the learned Government Pleader for Home, representing the learned Advocate General, appearing for the respondents. 2. This writ petition is taken up on the basis of am ‘telegram’, dated 26.03.207, by one Angadi Sanjeevamma, W/o. late Nageswararao, Vijilipet, Chirala Perala, Prakasam District, to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, alleging that her son, by name Mr. Angadi Suresh, was illegally detained from 23.03.2007 by the Circle Inspector of Police, City Crime Station, Lalapet, Guntur District, by abducting and that the petitioner has been apprehending danger to the life of the alleged detenu. 3. After receiving notices, issued by this Court, In the counter-affidavit filed by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Lalapet Crime Police Station, Guntur, filed counter-affidavit stating, inter alia, that the alleged detenu is an accused in Crime No.50 of 2006 along with others, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code, of Ponnur Police Station, and in that connection, he was apprehended by the police on 27.03.2007 at 8.00 a.m. at Sharaf Bazar, Ponnur, and the stolen properties were also seized from him under a cover of panchanama; that after following necessary formalities, the alleged detenu was produced before the Additional Munsif Magistrate, Ponnur, on 27.03.2007, who remanded him to the judicial custody and that the alleged detenu was lodged in Sub-Jail, Ponnur. 4. In view of these revelations in the counter- affidavit, we do not see any merit in the writ petition, the same fails and is liable to be dismissed. 5. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed, at the stage of admission. However, there shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA _____________________ JUSTICE D.APPA RAO 05TH APRIL 2007 MAS/KRK