T PURSHOTHAM Vs. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner herein, who is a practicising Advocate, has made a grievance that for what he thought was his legitimate duty and accordingly informed this Court by telegrams that quite a few persons were kept at different police stations of the district of Mahbubnagar illegally, have been subjected to serious harassment by respondents 1 to 7 and called by them by notices under Section 160(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to appear before them for interrogation in matters with which he has absolutely no concern and on the allegation that he has failed to respond to such notices, he has been subjected to the charge under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) In response to the notice issued by this Court, only 7th respondent has filed a counter and has stated as follows :

(3.) The statement that the petitioner was summoned in writing to appear before the police in the cases referred to in paragraph 4 of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition is relevant for appreciating the fact that the petitioner had sent a telegram to this Court on 11-11-1996 informing the Court that as many as five persons were illegally detained by the police and he had issued a press note to the said effect. According to the petitioner, alerted by these developments, the police produced the said five persons before the Judicial First Class Magistrate at Achampet and they were remanded to judicial custody. Circle Inspector of Police, Achampet, Mahbubnagar District, however, was irked, it appears for the above reason and, according to the petitioner, issued summons on 5-12-1996, purportedly under Section 160 Cr.P.C. which is as follows :