N. SANDHYA AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Smt. N. Sandhya, the wife of detenu No. 1, namely Nalamasa Krishna, and Smt. B. Chandrakala, the wife of detenu No. 2, namely B. Maddileti, have filed the present Habeas Corpus petition ostensibly on the ground that on 15-10-2019, at about 7:50 a.m., about forty persons in plain clothes had entered the office -cum- residence of Telangana Praja Front situated at Baghlingampally, Hyderabad, and took away their respective husbands. Amongst these plain clothed persons, there were two policemen in their uniforms. While the detenus were being taken away, both the petitioners and their well wishers requested the police to give the reasons for apprehending the detenus, but the police did not give any reasons. Only one of those policemen disclosed his name as Sri Srinivas Rao, and gave his contact number to one Smt. Rani, w/o Manchu Ramesh. Subsequent to that date, the whereabouts of the detenus are unknown. Hence, the present Habeas Corpus petition before this Court.

(2.) By order dated 15-10-2019, this Court had directed Mr. Sripathi Santosh Kumar, the learned Government Pleader attached to the office of the Advocate General, to produce both the detenus before this Court.

(3.) On 16-10-2019, the learned Government Pleader informed this Court that in fact, both the detenus were arrested in connection with FIR. No. 191 of 2019 dated 05-10-2019, registered at Police Station, Gadwal, for the offences under Sections 120(B) IPC, Section 8(i)(ii) of Telangana State Public Security Act, Section 18, 18(B) & 20 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. Subsequently, they were produced before the Judicial First Class Magistrate (FAC) Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gadwal. The learned Magistrate has remanded both the accused persons to judicial custody till 18-10-2019. Thus, according to the learned counsel, the custody of the detenus is not an illegal one. Moreover, on 21-10-2019, the State has filed a counter-affidavit. Along with the counter-affidavit, the State has filed not only the copy of FIR No. 191 of 2019 dated 05- 10-2019, but also the continuation remand case diary, the remand order dated 16-10-2019, and the arrest memo dated 15-10-2019, in order to support its case that both the arrest and the remand are legal.