SABA BEGUM Vs. STATE OF TELANGANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have filed the present Habeas Corpus petition inter alia on the ground that the detenus, namely Syed Sahail and Syed Mohammed, were picked up by the police on 08.09.2019 and their family members have not been informed about their formal arrest. In fact, their whereabouts are unknown. Thus, they are in illegal custody of the police.

(2.) In compliance with the order dated 23.09.2019, the Commissioner of Police has filed a report. The same shall be taken on record.

(3.) According to the report, the detenus were picked up in relation to Cr.No.399 of 2019 registered at Raidurgam Police Station. According to the Commissioner of Police, the police suspected that the crime had been committed by the detenus as the modus operandi for commission of the offence was similar to the one that was adopted in Cr.No.1263 of 2019 for offence under Sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Rajendranagar Police Station. Moreover, according to the Commissioner of Police, the accused, Syed Sahail and Syed Mohammed, were taken into custody on 17.09.2019 at 9:50 AM near Tolichowki. The fact that they were picked up was informed to the Investigating Officer around 10:05 AM. He further submits that till 10:00 AM nobody was produced by the police before the Rajendranagar Police Station. He further states that from the personal possession of Syed Sahail, the police had seized one chain, one pair of mateelu (toe rings), two gold bangles, one Samsung cell phone, and cash of Rs.1,000/-; from the personal possession of Syed Mohammed, the police had recovered one Laptop, three screw drivers, one Samsung phone, and cash of Rs.5,000/- in the presence of mediator witnesses, namely Janampally Anand Kumar and Sourav Saha. He further states in the report that the complainant's wife, Smt. Harini Anbalagan had submitted photographs for the gold ornaments, which were allegedly stolen by the detenus, in order to prove the identity of the stolen jewellery. By looking at the photographs the police concluded that the gold articles seized from the possession of the detenus were same as the allegedly stolen ones.