A writ petition filed under Article 22 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of habeas corpus to release a detainee was dismissed as infructuous because the statutory maximum period of one year for detention had already come to an end.
The Writ Petition seeking a writ of Habeas Corpus was dismissed as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
(RNT, j & AGD, J W.P.No.19129 of 2025)
APHC010371472025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE 10th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 19129 OF 2025
Between:
...Petitioner
AND
...Respondents
2
(RNT, j & AGD, J W.P.No.19129 of 2025) Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased tomay be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the Respondent authorities to produce the Detenue i.e., K. Pandurangan, S/o. Chinnapaya Reddy, aged 35 years i.e., the Petitioners husband who is now detained in the Central Prison, Kadapa, Y.S.R. Kadapa District before this Honble High Court and release him by declaring the impugned Detention Order vide No. REV-CSEC0PDL(PRC)/5/2025-MAGL4 dated 19.06.2025 issued by the Respondent No. 3 and the confirmation order vide G.O.Rt.No. 1227 dated 25.06.2025 issued by the Respondent No. 1 as illegal, arbitrary unconstitutional and violative of Article 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India and in contrary to the judgments of the Honble Supreme Court of India and High Courts and pass
IA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to pass an interim order by suspending the impugned Detention Order vide No. REV-CSEC0PDL(PRC)/5/2025-MAGL4 dated 19.06.2025 issued by the Respondent No. 3 and the confirmation order vide G.O.Rt.No. 1227 dated 25.06.2025 issued by the Respondent No. 1, until disposal of the above writ petition and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRINIVASA RAO NARRA
Counsel for the Respondents: ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following order:
3
(RNT, j & AGD, J W.P.No.19129 of 2025)
ORDER :- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari)
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks adjournment to obtain instructions from the petitioner.
No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall
also stand closed.
____________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI, J
____________________ ALAPATI GIRIDHAR, J
Date: 10.09.2026 RPD/KSK.
4
(RNT, j & AGD, J W.P.No.19129 of 2025)
45
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI AND
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ALAPATI GIRIDHAR
(Dismissed as Infructuous)
WRIT PETITION NO: 19129 of 2025
Date: 10.09.2026
RPD/KSK.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Writ Petition seeking habeas corpus for the petitioner's husband is maintainable after the statutory maximum period of detention has expired.
P. Vijaya Nirmala
The State of Andhra Pradesh
Ravi Nath Tilhari
Alapati Giridhar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
