Allowed

Balemla Kiran Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC7 Jun 2022WP/6416/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble High Court of Telangana allowed a writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking direction to produce the detenue Balemula Prem in Habeas Corpus proceedings. The Court set aside the impugned detention order and the consequential confirmation order as they were found to be illegal.

What did the court decide?

Impugned detention order and confirmation order set aside. Detenue Balemula Prem directed to be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any criminal case.

Balemla Kiran Kumar Vs The State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER AND

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 6416 OF 2022

¶7

Between:

¶8

Balemla Kiran Kumar, S/o. Balemla lt4ysaiah, aged 40 years, Occ; Pvt Service, Fl/o. H.No.6-3712, Chiwemla Mandal, Kudakuda, nalgonda, Telangana State 508 213.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary. General Administration (Spl. (Law and Order) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶12

The Commissioner of Police and Addl District Magistrate (Executive), Rackahonda Commisionerate.

¶13

The Superintendent, Central Prison Cherlapally, tr/edchal - lValkajgiri District

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing 3rd Respondent to produce the detenue i.e. Balemula Prem now detained in Central Prison Cherlapally, Medchal - lMalkajgiri District before this Hon'ble Court and set-aside impugned detention order passed by the 2nd Respondent No. B3/PD-CELL/CCRB/RCKD|2021 , dt. 0810712021 and approved by 1st Respondent as being illegal, arbitrary, improper, unilateral, u nconstitutio na I and violative of Article 21 and 22 of the Constitution of lndia and to forthwith release the Detenue.

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI.PASHAM TRIVIKRAM REDDY

¶17

Counsel for the Respondents : ADDL ADVOCATE GENERAL

¶18

It is ordered as follows :^-

¶19

Y /

¶20

THE HON'BLE^{Dr. IUSTICESHAMEEMAKTHER} AND THE HON'BLE^{SMT.JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI}

¶21

w ITP TITIO^{NNo64L6oF 20 22}

¶22

ADVANCE^{ORDER: (Per Hon'ble Dr'sA,J)}

¶23

In the result, the^{Writ Petitionis allowed'The impugned} detentionordervideNo.S3/PD-CELL/CCRB/RCKD/2021'dated

¶24

08.07.2021,^{passedby the respondentNo 2, and the consequential} ConfirmationorderVideG.o'Rt.No.233l,GeneralAdministration (Spl. (Law & Order))^{Department, dated21 10'2021' passedby the} respondent^{No.1, are herebyset aside The respondentsare} directedtosetthedetenu,namelyBalemulaPrem'S/oKiran'at liberty forthwith,^{if he ls no longer requiredin any othercriminal} case.

¶25

(Detailed order follows)

SD/.T.JAYASREE

ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR

//TRUE^COPY//

a" L

SECTION^OFFICER

to ., . ,n" principar Secretary, Generar Administration.^{(Spr. (Law andorder)} Deoartment, s".'"t'iiii,^{si'teof Telanganaat Hvderabad} , ff 5U;;^{iir:""Li'"i'F"ri"J rn"o'nJo r olit|."tM alistrate( Executive),} 3. The Rackahonda Superintenoent,'d?n't'rlilrison^{Commisionerate' crrertapally,} ..^Ir,4edchal r,^,.r^,.^r^{- Malkaigiri District'} rrra'zainiri Diqtrir:l (BY SPecial Messender) 4. Two CC to^{Advocare"Cli""fHigh Courtfor the State of Telanganaat} Hvderabad.^(OUT)

¶32

Hvderabad.^(OUT) 5. ij'""""#i,l siirlpds^{nnrr,t r RI vl KRAM R E D DY' Advocate[o P u c]} o. Two CD^CoPies 7. One spare^coPY s.A MMA k

HIGH COURT

DATED:0710612022

ADVANCE ORDER

WP.No.6416 of 2022

R
o lHE sIA
)(r
o t
0 / JUt\l 202
()
*
{
t
(- TATC H,o

¶38

ALLOWING THE W.P

¶39

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶40

v
0 b
ot<br>e,

Balemla Kiran Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balemla Kiran Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A. Siva Krishna Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Smt. Yellajyoshla Sujatha Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Mr. Shaik Sanavulla Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. C. Naga Anjani and 2 Others Vs Chandrasekhar

Shiva Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Naren Lal Kumavath Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others