David Sophia Pranathi vs The State Of Telangana And 3 Others

            HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

      THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN
                                  AND
               THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

                  WRIT PETITION No.24584 of 2020
                             04.01.2021
Between:
David Sophia Pranathi
                                                           ...Petitioner
and

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Department of Home,
BRKR Bhavan, Hyderabad
and 3 others.

                                                       ...Respondents

Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. R. Anurag Counsel for the respondents: Mr. T. Srikanth Reddy GP for Home The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Sri Raghvendra Singh Chauhan) The present Habeas Corpus Writ Petition has been filed, ostensibly, on the ground that the petitioner's husband, Mavuduru Rama Kumar, was picked up by the Station House Officer, Madhapur Police Station, on 23.12.2020 around 06:00 am. Ever since then, his whereabouts are unknown. Therefore, the petitioner has bona fide belief that her husband is illegally detained by the respondent No.4.

Mr. T. Srikanth Reddy, the learned Government Pleader for Home, has filed instructions, dated 03.01.2021. The same shall be taken on record.

Mr. T. Srikanth Reddy submits that on 12.12.2020, Ms. K. Keerthi had lodged a complaint with the respondent No.4 wherein the detenu is arrayed as accused No.3. The said FIR has been registered for the offences under Sections 420, 406, 506 read with Section 34 IPC, and for the offence under Section 5 of the Telangana State Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999. During the course of investigation, the detenu was arrested on 30.12.2020, and on 31.12.2020, he was produced before the learned XII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Kukatpally, Cyberabad. The learned Magistrate has remanded the detenu to judicial custody. Therefore, according to the learned Government Pleader, the custody of the detenu is a legal one.

On the other hand, Mr. R. Anurag, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that, in fact, the detenu was picked up on 23.12.2020, and was illegally detained till 30.12.2020. 3

Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Admittedly, as of today, the detenu happens to be in judicial custody. Therefore, his custody is, indeed, a legal one. Hence, this Court does not find any merit in the present Habeas Corpus Writ Petition. However, it is clarified that, in case the petitioner or the detenu are of the opinion that the detenu's personal liberty has been violated by the State, they shall be free to pursue the legal remedies available to them against the State.

The writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

The miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________________ RAGHVENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN, CJ ____________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J 04.01.2021 Lrkm