IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH WRIT PETITION No: 8666 of 2004 BETWEEN: 1 Smt. Bode Subba Lakshmi, W/o. G. Gopal Reddy, Hindu, R/o. 27/2/152, Balajinagar, Nellore. 2 Sri B. Gopal Reddy, S/o. Late B. Pulla Reddy, Hindu, R/o. 27/2/152, Balajinagar, Nellore. ... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Superintendent of Police, Nellore District. 2 The Sub-Inspector of Police, 6th Town Police Station, Nellore. 3 Mr. P. Mani, Police Constable, 6th Town Police Station, Nellore. 4 Sri V. Chinna Reddy, S/o. Not Known, Hindu, R/o. D.No. 16/2819, 2nd Lane, Near Jagans Degree College, Ramalingapuram, Nellore. 5 Singamsetty Rammohan, S/o. S. Narasimham, Hindu, R/o. D.No.27/2, 1149, Saraswathinagar, Nellore. ...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 a writ, direction, order or orders more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents Nos. 2 &3 in detaining me in the police custody from 11-3-2003 to 13-3-2004 without there being any crime registered nor involved in any offence as illegal, arbitrary, malafidy and violation of Art. 21 of the constitution of India and consequentially - a) direct the 1st respondent to take appropriate action against the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 particularly the respondent Nos.2 & 3 and do justice to me b) to award compensation Rs.1,00,000/- in favour of the petitioners to be paid by the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 for the harassment and mental agony for my illegal detention in the 6th town police station of Nellore by the 2nd and 3rd respondents in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR.A.CHANDRAIH NAIDU Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER: Petitioners submit that with regard to the civil disputes pending between them and the fifth respondent, the respondents 4 and 5 approached the second respondent/Sub-Inspector of Police, VI Town Police Station, Nellore, and all of them have planned to kidnap the second petitioner and with the aid of the respondents 2 and 3 detained him in the police station from 11.03.2004 to 13.03.2004 for no fault of his and without there being any criminal case registered against him. They further submit that the second petitioner was forcibly taken to the Sub-Registrar Office, Nellore by the respondents 2 to 5 along with the Advocates and got cancelled the earlier gift deed executed in favour of his children. They submit that the police illegally detained the second petitioner and therefore, he is entitled for compensation for illegal detention from 11.03.2004 to 13.03.2004 without there being any crime registered against him. 2. Counter has been filed on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 stating that on a private complaint filed by the fifth respondent on the file of the II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nellore, the same was referred to the second respondent for investigation and accordingly a case in Cr.No.29 of 2004 under Sections 323, 423, 427, 452, 464, 120-B of Indian Penal Code read with Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure was registered on 27.02.2004 against the petitioners herein and nine others and the same is under investigation. It is stated that the second petitioner was not at all detained in the police station as alleged from 11.03.2004 to 13.03.2004 and in fact, no arrest has been effected. All other allegations that the second respondent was forcibly taken to the Sub- Registrar Officer to get the gift deed canceled on 13.03.2004 have been denied. It is stated that the second petitioner was not at all brought to the police station on 07.04.2004. 3. In view of the categorical denial of all the allegations in the counter and as the crime is said to have been registered against the petitioners on 27.02.2004 and in the absence of any arrests being shows, the disputed questions of fact cannot be decided in the writ petition. Therefore, the petitioners are not entitled for any relief in the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ V. ESWARAIAH, J April 24, 2008 DSK