Hanumanla Devender v. State of nistration (Spl. (Law and Order) Department, S6cretariat, Hyd'erabad
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 21, 22, 226
Judgment
Cause title
circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Habeas corpus, directing 3rd Respondent to produce the detenue i.e. Gaddam Sampath now detained in central prison cherlapally, Medchal- Malkajgiri District before this Honorable court and set-aside the impunged detention order passed by the 2nd Respondent vide c.No. 69s/ wRC/ CSB-Xli 2024, dated 01-11-2024 and Confirmation Order vide G.O.Rt. No. 1599, dated 03-12-2024 passed by 1st Respondent as being iilegal, arbitrary, improper, unilateral, unco nstitutio nal and violative of Article 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India and to forthwith release the Detenue Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY (Nor pREsENr) Counsel for the Respondents: ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL I The Court made the following: ORDER '! THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HON'BLE JUSTICE B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO WRIT PETITION No.629 OF 2025
ORDER:
(1'}er Ilon'ble .Justicc Moushumi Bhattacharya) No one appears for the petitioner.
2. The proceeding sheets. show that the petitioner was not represented on several occasions and counsel appearing for the petitioner either took time or was not ready in the matter.
3. The Writ Petition lvas heard on several occasions from
29.01.2025- Counsel appearing for the appellant was given two opportunities on 24.03.2025 and 25.O3.2O25 to make his closing submissions.
4. We do not hnd any readiness or diligence on the part of counsel to proceed with the present Writ Petition.
5. W.P.No.629 of 2025, along with all connected applications, is accordingly dismissed for default. lnterim orders, il any, shall stand vacated. There sha1l be no order as to costs. \ To, //TRUE COPY// SD/.A. SRINIVASA REDDY SISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER i)
One CC to SRI K.CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY' Advocate [OPUC]
Two CCs to ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL, High Court for the State of Telangana at HYderabad [OUT]
Two CD CoPies BSR LS l t I a HIGH COURl- DATED: 0910412025 p ORDER WP.No.629 ot 2025 . .-.9 ) (< c r) Ir 3 0 APii 2[25 l oEspATcs cC z 4-- a DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION FOR DEFAULT, WITHOUT COSTS 6 T
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 21, 22, 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Telangana High Court, on 03 Dec 2024. The bench was MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.