Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/14533/2026 of Syed Mahaboob Basha Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh on 22 June 2026
_____________ Date of reserved for orders : Date of pronouncement : 23.06.2026 Date of uploading : 30.06.2026 APHC010281392026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3562] TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE
Neutral Citation: _____________
Date of reserved for orders
:
Date of pronouncement
: 23.06.2026
Date of uploading
: 30.06.2026
APHC010281392026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JUNE
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
Between:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. SYED MAHABOOB BASHA, , S/O. SYED HASEN, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, MUSLIM, OCC. DRIVER, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT DOOR NO. 52/15-2, SBI COLONY, MARIAPURAM, KADAPA.
...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, AMARAVATHI
- 522238
2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE DGP, VIJAYAWADA- GUNTUR HIGH WAY, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR-522503
3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 516002
4. THE SDPOCUMDEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KADAPA TOWN, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH - 516002
5. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER SHO, II TOWN PS, KADAPA, YSR KADAPA DISTRICT - 516002
6. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER SHO, CHINNA CHOWK PS, KADAPA, YSR DISTRICT - 516002
7. U PRATHAP REDDY, S/O. UNKNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SUB- INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHINNA CHOWK PS KADAPA, YSR DISTRICT - 516002
...RESPONDENT(S): 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 topleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus, directing the respondents to forthwith produce the detenues, namely Shaik Riyaz Ali, S/o. Shaik Masthan, aged about 28 years, and Patan Athaulla Khan @ Athavulla Patan @ Athul, S/o. Patan Noor Khan, aged about 34 years, before this Honble Court and set them at liberty by declaring their apprehension and detention as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India AND/OR Pass IA NO: 1 OF 2026 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 pleased to direct immediate judicial inquiry into the illegal detention of Athavulla Khan Patan @ Athavulla Patan, S/o Patan Noor Khan, aged about 34 years, residing at D.No.8/40, Savaipura Street, Kadapa, Andhra Pradesh, Accused.No.7 in Cr.No.349 OF 2024, Kadapa II Town PS and conduct of the police officials involved and/or Pass Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. DHEERA KANISHKA Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following:
ORDER: (per Ravi Nath Tilhari, J)
Heard Sri Dheera Kanishka, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Krishna Praneeth, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 6.
2. This petition for Habeas Corpus has been filed with the following prayer: “……..to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to forthwith produce the detenues namely Shaik Riyaz Ali S/o Shaik Masthan aged about 28 years and Patan Athaulla Khan Athavulla Patan Athul S/o Patan Noor Khan aged about 34 years before this Honble Court and set them at liberty by declaring their apprehension and detention as illegal arbitrary unconstitutional and violative of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India AND/OR Pass.”
3. On 14.05.2026, passed the following order:
“Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondents.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondents submits that two detenues who are the friends of the petitioner were produced before the learned III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kadapa, in connection with Crime No.58 of 2026 for the alleged offences punishable under Section 8(c), 20(b)(ii)(c) of N.D.P.S.Act, as accused Nos.3 and 5 and the remand is yet to be finalized.
Hence, list this matter on 21.05.2026 for getting complete instructions from the end of respondent-police.”
4. Time was granted to learned Government Pleader to obtain complete instructions.
5. Based on the written instructions, learned Government Pleader submits that the detenues were arrested by the Station House Officer, Kadapa I Town U/G Police Station in Crime No.58 of 2026 and were produced before the judicial Magistrate for remand. On remand, the detenues were lodged in the Central Prison, Kadapa.
6. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that subsequently, the detenues have been granted bail and released on bail.
7. He however further submits that the order of remand is bad in law.
8. There is no challenge against the remand order in the present petition.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the detenues want to challenge the order of remand.
10. The writ petition has been rendered infructuous and is dismissed.
11. The detenues are at liberty as per law and as may be advised.
No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
___________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI,J
______________________ SUBHENDU SAMANTA,J
Dated:23.06.2026 AG
Whether the Order is: Speaking Reasoned
Reportable Non-reportable
Dated:23.06.2026 AG