WP/34105/2025 of BOGGAVARAPU VINILA Vs THE STATE OF AP on 7 December 2025

1. BOGGAVARAPU V YEARS, OCC. HO VILLAGE, KAREMP

1. THE STATE OF DEPARTMENT O VELAGAPUDI, GUN

2. THE SUPERINTE NARASARAOPET.

3. THE STATION HO PALNADU DISTRIC

4. THE SUBINSPECT PALNADU DISTRIC Petition under Articl circumstances stated in pleased topleased to issu the nature of Writ of Hab E HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) Y, THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT RI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVEND LE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALL KRISHNA RAO RIT PETITION NO: 34105/2025 VINILA, W/O. NAGA RAJU, AGE OUSEWIFE, R/O. PEDDA BAZAR, PUDI MANDAL, PALNADU DISTRICT AND AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL OF HOME

SECRETARIAT NTUR DISTRICT. ENDENT OF POLICE, PALNAD OUSE OFFICER, KAREMPUDI POL CT TOR OF POLICE, KAREMPUDI POL CT ...RES le 226 of the Constitution of India pra the affidavit filed therewith, the High ue a writ or order or direction more pa eas Corpus under Article 226 of Con DESH

R DRANATH ROY I GOPALA ED ABOUT 24 CHINTAPALLI T-522614 ...PETITIONER SECRETARY, BUILDINGS, U DISTRICT, ICE STATION, LICE STATION, SPONDENT(S): aying that in the h Court may be articularly one in nstitution of India to directing the 2nd respondent to produce detenue Mr. Boggavarapu Naga Raju, S/o. Ramaiah, aged about 30 years, R/o. Pedda Bazar, Chintapalli Village, Karempudi Mandal, Palnadu District-522614 wrongfully confined by the Respondents No. 3 and 4, before this Hon'ble Court immediately and for the court to deal with in accordance with law and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 the Respondent No.1 to 3 to secure the CC Footage record of Karempudi Police Station, Palnadu District from 30.12.2025 to till 04.12.2025 and produce before this Hon’ble Court and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. KALE VIJAYA RAJU Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL

The Court made the following: ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy)

This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India, for Habeas Corpus, is filed seeking direction to the respondents-Police officials to produce the Corpus by name Boggavarapu Naga Raju who is husband of the petitioner, alleged to have been wrongfully confined by respondent Nos.3 and 4, before the Court and then to pass appropriate orders according to law.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader attached to the office of learned Advocate General appearing for the official respondent Nos.1 to 4.

3. The petitioner is the wife of the Corpus by name Boggavarapu Naga Raju. It is pleaded in writ petition that on 30.11.2025, at about 4.30 P.M., the Police Constable by name Rama Krishna and another person came to the house of the petitioner and called the Corpus to attend before the Station House Officer, Karempudi Police Station and accordingly, he went to the Police Station and thereafter, he did not return home and when her relatives went to the Police Station to ascertain the reasons for keeping the Corpus in the custody of the Police, it is stated that the 3rd respondent informed them that they are suspecting that the Corpus is involved in a kidnap case and on the next day, at about 1.00 A.M., the Corpus came back to the house and again the 3rd respondent called the Corpus to the Police Station and on 01.12.2025, he went to the Police Station and again returned home and thereafter, the Police are frequently summoning the Corpus to the Police Station and when the Corpus went to the Police Station, he has been illegally confined in the Police Station without any valid reason. Therefore, the petitioner sought the aforesaid relief in the instant writ petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, would submit at time of hearing the writ petition that the Corpus was subsequently released from the custody of the Police and thereafter, he was found missing and he is at present not in the custody of the 3rd respondent- Station House Officer of Karempudi Police Station and a report was lodged with the Police that the whereabouts of the Corpus are not known and that they registered a “man missing” case in FIR.No.108 of 2025 on 07.12.2025 in Karempudi Police Station.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader also, on instructions, submits that the Corpus is not in the custody of the 3rd respondent-Station House Officer of Karempudi Police Station, as alleged in writ petition and he submits that a crime was registered against the Corpus in crime No.107 of 2025 on 30.11.2025 and the Corpus is accused No.4 in the said crime and he was summoned by the 3rd respondent for enquiry in connection with the above crime and thereafter, he was sent back. He would further submit that subsequently, the petitioner herself lodged a report with the Police alleging that the Corpus is found missing and his whereabouts are not known and on the basis of the said report, a crime in FIR.No.108 of 2025 was registered in Karempudi Police Station on 07.12.2025 as a “man missing” case and the Police are now making efforts to trace his whereabouts.

6. In view of the aforesaid submissions made by both the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents, it is now evident that the Corpus is not in illegal confinement or detention of the respondents-Police officials and particularly in the custody of the 3rd respondent. He was, earlier, only summoned in connection with the crime registered against him and thereafter, he was sent back and subsequently he was found missing, as he voluntarily went away somewhere. Therefore, on the report lodged by the petitioner herself, a “man missing” case was registered against him and the Police are now in the process of tracing his whereabouts. In that view of the matter, it cannot be said that the Corpus has been in illegal confinement or detention of the respondents-Police officials. The law has to take its own course as regards the FIR registered relating to “man missing” case.

7. Recording the aforesaid submissions of both the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

______________________________________________ JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

Date: 08.12.2025 MDP