Division Bench disposed of an unopposed habeas corpus petition filed by the petitioner for the illegal arrest of her husband after the police produced him before the Metropolitan Magistrate, holding the petition infructuous.
Writ Petition disposed as infructuous; liberty to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedies if detachment was illegal.
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 C. V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
AND THE HON’ BLE SRI JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION No. 3713 of 2018
Date: 06th February, 2018
Between:
Keetha Sri Devi
… Petitioner
And
The State of Telangana and 3 others
… Respondents
COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER : Peeta Raman
COUNSEL FOR RESPONDENTS : G.P. for Home (TS)
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
wp_3713_2018 CVNR, J & GSP, J
2
ORDER : (per Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy)
This Writ Petition is filed for issue of Habeas Corpus for producing Keetha Venkata Ramana, the husband of the petitioner (for short, ‘the alleged detenu’), who was allegedly detained illegally on 04.02.2018.
__________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
____________________________ GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD, J
06th February, 2018 KSM
wp_3713_2018 CVNR, J & GSP, J
3
THE HON’ BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
AND
THE HON’ BLE SRI JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION No. 3713 of 2018
(Order of the Division Bench delivered by Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy)
06th February, 2018
KSM
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Writ Petition filed for habeas corpus with respect to alleged illegal detention can be disposed off on account of subsequent production of the detenue in judicial custody.
Keetha Sri Devi
The State of Telangana and 3 others
C. V. Nagarjuna Reddy
Gudiseva Shyam Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
