This judgment records an oral order regarding a Habeas Corpus writ petition dismissed at the stage of admission because the petitioner had previously filed and lost an identical petition seeking production of the same alleged detenu.
The writ petition is dismissed at the stage of admission with no order as to costs.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO
TAKEN UP WRIT PETITION No.26849 of 2009
Date: 09.12.2009
Between :
Udatha Yadamma.
… Petitioner
and
The Station House Officer,
Chandur Police Station,
Nalgonda District and another.
… Respondents
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO
TAKEN UP WRIT PETITION No.26849 of 2009
ORAL ORDER : (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice D.S.R.Varma)
This Writ of Habeas Corpus is initiated at the instance of the petitioner’s letter, dated –nil-, wherein it is alleged that the husband of the petitioner viz., U. Narasimha, s/o. Sailu, aged 30 years, was illegally detained since 22.11.2009 by the police of Chandur Police Station, Nalgonda District, that she is apprehending danger to his life and set him at liberty.
2. When the matter came up for hearing, it has been brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, representing the learned Advocate General, appearing for the respondents, that earlier W.P.No.26080 of 2009 was filed by the petitioner through Sri T.L.Nayan Kumar, Advocate, seeking for production of the alleged detenu herein and the said writ petition was dismissed by this Court on 8.12.2009, in view of the fact that the alleged detenu was arrested in pursuant to the registration of a crime and remanded to judicial custody.
3. Having filed the above writ petition by engaging an advocate, the petitioner has resorted to send this letter seeking the very same relief for production of the alleged detenu before this Court.
4. In view of the fact that W.P.No.26080 of 2009 filed by the petitioner was already dismissed, we are of the view that there is absolutely no reason to continue the present writ petition any further.
5. For the foregoing, there are no merits in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, at the stage of admission. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
_______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA
_________________________ JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO 09.12.2009. Msr
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO
TAKEN UP WRIT PETITION No.26849 of 2009
09.12.2009
(Msr)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a subsequent writ petition seeking production of a detenu should be allowed after a prior petition on the same subject was already dismissed.
Whether a Habeas Corpus petition filed via letter has merits for continuation after an earlier formal petition was dismissed.
Udatha Yadamma
Station House Officer, Chandur Police Station
another
D.S.R. Varma
R. Kantha Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
