CH SIDDAIAH Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two advocates on the rolls of the Andhra Pradesh State Bar Council have invoked this Court's jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for an appropriate writ, order or direction, including declaration that the action of the respondents herein in detaining the petitioners on 30-10-1996 at Itarsi in the State of Madhya Pradesh and for compensation for the injury and hardship caused to them on account of the said illegal detention.

(2.) Facts which appear to us relevant for the issues involved in the instant proceeding are as follows: - Petitioners reached Itarsi at about 10 P.M. in the late evening on 29-10-1996 by A.P. Express from Secunderabad to attend a case on behalf of one Srikant Jalagam (Criminal Case No. 183 of 1995). On 30-10-1996, they attended the Court, on which date the Court by its judgment, in the said case, acquitted Srikant Jalagam of all the charges levelled against him. Petitioners, as desired by Srikant Jalagam, intended to see him in Bhopal Central Jail on 31-10-1996. Srikant was, however, taken to Railway Station in a bus. Petitioners travelled in the same bus and by their reaching Bhopal, checked in a lodge. The first petitioner, however, intended to pass on the message of acquittal to Hyderabad. When he and the second petitioner were accosted by as many as seven policemen in mufti carrying revolvers, they (policemen) wanted to forcibly lift the petitioners and questioned them about their identity. Petitioners informed them that they were advocates from Hyderabad City and had come to Itarsi and from Itarsi to Bhopal in connection with Srikant Jalagam's case. Policemen, however, prevented the petitioners from calling Hyderabad on phone, abused them in filthy language and forcibly took them in a Jeep car to Itarsi Police Head-quarters. First petitioner has stated in the affidavit, which has been filed on behalf of the petitioners as follows:

(3.) Counter and additional counter-affidavit have been filed on behalf of the respondents in which it is stated that there is no Officer designated as Officer in-charge Anti Naxalite Squad, Police Head Quarters, Lakidi-ka-pool, Hyderabad and that the deponent Sri S.R. Tiwari monitors, co-ordinates and integrates the Anti-Naxalite Operation in the State with the Superintendents of Police of Districts of Andhra Pradesh, that no Police Officer under his control proceeded to Itarsi or dealt with the petitioners as alleged. The affidavit further states as follows: