Kochiri Mariyamma v. The Director General & Inspector General of Police
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 06 May 2009
- Bench
- T MEENA KUMARI, B CHANDRA KUMAR
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 155(2)
Judgment
Cause title
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 appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents police to produce Sri Kochiri Ashok, S/o. Premaiah, aged 22 Years, R/o. Lingapuram Village, Amaravathi Mandal, Guntur District, before this Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI DEVAKUMAR SALIKITI Counsel for the RespondentS: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO : 8956 of 2009
ORAL ORDER:
(Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondent- police to produce Sri Kochiri Ashok, S/o Premaiah, aged 22 years, resident of Lingapuram Village, Amaravathi Mandal, Guntur District, before the Court and set him at liberty. It is the main grievance of the writ petitioner that her son was taken to the police station and was detained therein and on 25.4.2009, she went to the police station and noticed that her son is suffering from the effects of the third degree torture and she requested the 3rd respondent not to beat her son, but they paid a deaf ear and on
26.4.2009, she was informed that the police shifted her son to some other police station and they did not reveal the place where he was kept. The learned Advocate-General has taken notice of the writ petition and filed a counter-affidavit of the 3rd respondent to the effect that on the statement given by one Sathuluri Yesaiah, S/o Sundarshana Rao during the course of his treatment Government Hospital alleging that the alleged detenu and three others beat him and damaged the ice cream boxes due to previous enemity, the 3rd respondent-police filed an application under Section 155(2) C.P.C. before the II Additional Junior Civil Judge, Sattenapalli, on
Operative part
20.4.2009 with a request to accord permission to register and investigate the case and the case has been adjourned to 4.5.2009 and except making GD entry and the application to the Court, the 3rd respondent-police never in any manner illegally detained the alleged detenu either on 24.4.2009 or on any other subsequent date. In view of the above statement made by the injured in question as well as the submission made by the learned Advocate General and in view of the application pending before the Court below, We feel that no further orders are required in this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. _________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari __________________________ Justice B. Chandra Kumar Date: 06.05.2009 Nn/gurc THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.CHANDRA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 8956 of 2009 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 6th May, 2009
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 155(2).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 06 May 2009. The bench was T MEENA KUMARI, B CHANDRA KUMAR.
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.