IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO WRIT PETITION NOS: 14424 & 14455 of 2008 W.P.No.14424/2008 Between: Sultan Bee W/o. md.Hussain R/o. D.no. 20-21/2B, Venkateswara Colony, Atchampet, Mahaboobnagar District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 State of A.P., Rep. by its Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2 Station House Officer, Osmania University Campus P.S. Osmania Univarsity, Hyderabad. 3 Sobharani S/o. Anthaiah R/o. Sajeevaiah Nagar Colony, Deverakonda, Nalgonda District. .....RESPONDENTS 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 an order direction or a writ more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the 2nd respondent herein to produce the petitioner's son, Md. Jaffer, S/o. Md. Hussain, aged about 26 years, R/o. D.no.20/21/2B, Venkateswara Colony, Atchampet, Mahaboobnagar District, before Hon'ble Court and Consequently release him and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MRS.SHANTHI NEELAM Counsel for the Respondents 1 & 2: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL Writ Petition No : 14455 of 2008 Between: Md.Hussain, H.No.20-21/2B, Atchampet Mahaboobnagar District-509375 ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Station House officer, Osmania University Police station, Hyderabad 2 The Commissioner of Police, AP Hyderabad 3 The Station House officer, Devarakonda, Nalgonda District 4 The Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda District 5 The Station House officer, Atchampet, Mahaboobnagar District 6 The Superintendent of Police, Mahaboobnagar District 7 The Government of AP., rep.by its Principal Secretary Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad 8 The District Collector, Hyderabad 9 The District Collector, Mahaboobnagar district 10 The District Collector, Nalgonda District .....RESPONDENTS 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 for the reasons stated in the "Letter" dated 4.7.2008 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 mandamus to call for the records and remarks from the Respondents herein in and connected with (i) missing of petitioner son by name Md.Jaffar, aged 26 years, since 42 years, (ii) threatening phone call from the relatives of Sobharani on 21.4.2008 (iii) complaint by the petitioner lodged in Osmania University Police Station on 24.5.2008 And this Hon`ble court may be pleased to pass appropriate orders directing the respondetns herien to probe into the matter and take necessary steps to find out petitioner’s son and provide justice to the petitioner in this regard and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: PETITION Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice A. Gopal Reddy) The mother of the alleged detenu filed W.P.No.14424 of 2008 for issuance of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the second respondent to produce her son, namely, Mohd. Jaffer, S/o. Md. Hussain. On the letter dated 4.07.2008 addressed by the father and mother of the very same alleged detenu to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice alleging that in spite of registration of Crime in F.I.R.No.145 of 2008, the police failed to interrogate the suspects in locating the whereabouts of their son, was taken up as a taken up writ petition. Since both the matters are filed for production of the very same alleged detenu, they are clubbed and heard together and disposed of by this common order. It is alleged that the petitioner’s son is missing from 22.05.2008 and as his whereabouts are not known, they came down to Hyderabad and enquired with the friends of their son and came to know that he was closely moving with the third respondent, namely, P. Sobharani, who is his co-student in B.Ed Course. It is stated that on 22.5.2008 at about 5.00 p.m. the alleged detenu along with the third respondent went to purchase books at Kothi, Hyderabad and since then his whereabouts are not known. Earlier to the said date of incident, the petitioner’s brother-in-law had received a phone call from cell No.9989105646 accusing that the alleged detenu was moving with the third respondent and threatened to do away with his life, if he has not discontinued the movements with the third respondent. It is alleged that on petitioner lodging a complaint with the Station House Officer, P.S. Osmania University Campus-the second respondent herein, a case in Crime No.145 of 208 has been registered, but no proper investigation has been take up to know the whereabouts of the alleged detenu. The Inspector of Police, Osmania University Police Station, Hyderabad-second respondent herein filed counter affidavit and also additional counter affidavit, stating that on registration of crime under the head of Man-missing investigation was taken up, which reveals that the alleged detenu and Sobharani-the third respondent were moving closely when they were pursuing their B.Ed. course and later the third respondent went to her parents house at Achampet. The Investigating Officer flashed the message on V.H.F. set and visited the room where the boy was last scene. On examination of the room-mate of the alleged detenu one Mr. Gangadhar, it was revealed that the alleged detenu came to his room along with one lady stayed for some time and thereafter both of them left the room. The investigation further reveals that the alleged detenu lastly attended his computer class on 22.05.2008 between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. and on receiving phone call he left the institute and since then he is not attending the institute. The police examined the parents of the third respondent. They stated that when the police approached their daughter on 2.06.2008, they learnt that she developed friendship with the alleged detenu while pursuing her B.Ed. studies, and till 2.06.2008 they were not aware of the said fact. It is submitted that the investigating officer also traced the Cell phone No.9989105645, and the same is come from a coin box phone, which is located at Gayatri General Stores. Since it is a coin box phone, the investigating Officer examined the owner of the said coin box phone, namely, Venkatesh, who informed that he is running the general stores and also the said coin box, but he cannot keep the track of his customers who made calls from the said phone. It is submitted that the investigation is still under progress and as and when the investigation is completed, necessary report will be filed, and in the meantime if the alleged detenu is traced, he will be produced before the Magistrate. Having regard to the various steps taken by the police after registering the crime, the only direction that can be given to the police is to complete the investigation within the time frame. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to complete the investigation within a period of two months and file necessary report before the jurisdictional Magistrate Court. In the event of the alleged detenu is traced out, he should be produced before the concerned Magistrate and after recording his statement, he should be handed over him to the concerned as directed by the Magistrate and inform the petitioner about the production of the alleged detenu before the Magistrate. Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. ___________________ (A.GOPAL REDDY, J.) _________________ (R. KANTHA RAO, J.) 27th November, 2008 Js.