Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/9448/2026 of Shaik Rehana, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 8 April 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION No.9448 of 2026 Between: 1. SHAIK REHANA, W/O.MOHAMED IMRAN, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/O.11
APHC010188762026
IN TH
THUR
TWO
THE HONOURABLE
THE HONOUR
W
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. SHAIK REHAN YEARS, R/O STAND, NELLO
1. THE STATE O SECRETARY BUILDINGS, V
- 522238.
2. THE DIRECTO HEADQUARTE 522503.
3. THE SUPERI DISTRICT. - 52
4. THE STATION NELLORE, SP
HE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) RSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL O THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDR AND RABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GE
NA, W/O.MOHAMED IMRAN, AGED .11-786-4, SANTHAPETA, MULU ORE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT, A ...P AND OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS TO HOME DEPARTMENT, SE VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTU OR GENERAL OF POLICE, A.P STA ERS, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR D INTENDENT OF POLICE, SPSR 24001. N HOUSE OFFICER, II TOWN POLIC PSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 524001. ...RESPO DESH
RANATH ROY EDELA D ABOUT 29 MUDI BUS A.P-524001. PETITIONER S PRINCIPAL ECRETARIAT R DISTRICT. ATE POLICE DISTRCT. - R NELLORE CE STATION, ONDENT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. MEDARA SIVA PRASAD Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION No.9448 of 2026 O R D E R: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy)
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader attached to the office of the learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents.
2. This writ petition for habeas corpus is filed alleging that the husband of the petitioner by name Mohamed Imran (hereinafter referred to as ‘corpus’) was whisked away by the 4th respondent - Station House Officer of II Town Police Station, Nellore, on 07.04.2026 at about 2.00 p.m. from his house illegally without any crime being registered against him and that he was not produced before the concerned Magistrate also and he has been illegally detained by the 4th respondent. Therefore, the petitioner sought direction to the 4th respondent to produce the corpus before the Court and to set him at liberty.
3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader attached to the office of the learned Advocate General, on written instructions which are placed on record, submits that the 4th respondent never whisked away the corpus from his house on 07.04.2026 at about 2.00 p.m. or on any other day and the said allegation made against the 4th respondent is absolutely false. He would submit that in fact, the police of Begumpet Police Station, Hyderabad, Telangana State, have taken the corpus into their custody and they have informed the said fact to the police of Chinna Bazar Police Station of Nellore. Therefore, it is denied that the 4th respondent has illegally detained the corpus.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also, on instructions, submits that it is a fact that the Begumpet police have taken the corpus from his house on 07.04.2026, but they have taken the assistance of Chinna Bazar police to take him into custody and that the Begumpet police have subsequently set the corpus at liberty and directed him to appear before them again for enquiry whenever he is called.
5. Therefore, the fact that now remains established from the aforesaid submissions made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, is that the 4th respondent did not take the corpus into custody and he did not illegally detain him as alleged by the petitioner and it is the Begumpet police who have taken the corpus into custody. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, even the Begumpet police have set the corpus at liberty and directed him to attend the police station for enquiry whenever he is required for enquiry.
6. Therefore, as it is now evident from the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the corpus is at liberty and he is not confined or illegally detained by the police, recording the said submission, the writ petition is closed. However, if the police interferes with the liberty of the corpus in future without following the due process of law, he is at liberty to move the Court for redressal of his grievance.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending, in this case shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
______________________________________ JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA Date: 09.04.2026 IBL
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA
WRIT PETITION No.9448 of 2026
Dt: 09.04.2026 IBL