SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(AP) 15536

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
KOLLIPARA SATYAVANI – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF AP – Respondent
WP 13395 / 2025



IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURESH REDDY AND THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE Y. LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 13395 OF 2025 Between:

Kollipara Satyavani, W/o. Seetharamanjaneyulu, Aged

51 years, R/o.

41-27-55, Marvadi Temple Street, Brabaramba Puram, Krishnalanka, Vijayawada - 520013, NTR District. Being the Mother of Mr. Nirmala Krishna Kumar Kollipara ...Petitioner AND

1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi, Amaravati, Guntur District.

2. The Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh Police Head Quarters, Mangalagiri, Guntur District.

3. The Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada, N.T.R. District.

4. The Station House Officer, Machavaram Police Station Vijayawada, N.T.R District.

...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more preferably in the nature of Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the respondent No.

2 to 4 to produce my son i.e Nirmala Krishna Kumar Kollipara, aged 32 years, who is in the p illegal custody of the Respondent No. 4 before this Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty and to hand over my son to me.

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KILARU NITHIN KRISHNA Counsel for the Respondents: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following order:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [ ]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY AND THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE Y.LAKSHMANA RAO WRIT PETITION ^)LNo.^5^of 2025 Between:

Kollipara Satyavani ...PETITIONER AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.Sri Kilaru Nithin Krishna Counsel for the Respondent(S):

I.Sri.T.Vishnu Teja, Special Government Pleader ORDER:- (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice K.Suresh Reddy)

The present Writ of Habeas Corpus is moved by way of house motion and My Lord the Hon’ble the Chief Justice has allotted the same to this Bench.

2. Heard Sri Kilaru Nithin Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri T.Vishnu Teja, learned Special Government Pleader, attached to the Office of learned Advocate General, appearing for the respondent-State through virtual mode.

3. Grievance of the petitioner is that on 10.05.2025 at about 11:00 A.M., her son by name Sri Nirmala Krishna Kumar Kollipara, was taken into custody by the respondent No.4 without assigning any valid reason and without informing that any crime has been registered. As whereabouts of the son of the petitioner are not known and he has been taken by the 4**^ respondent, the petitioner who is the mother of the said Nirmal Krishna Kumar Kollipara, filed the present Habeas Corpus Writ Petition.

4. Today, when the matter is taken up, Sri Kilaru Nithin Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that after filing of the present Writ Petition, the son of the petitioner is produced before the learned I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vijayawada on

11.05.2025 at about 9.30 P.M. and that he has been enlarged on bail.

5. On the other hand, Sri. T.Vishnu Teja, learned Special Government Pleader, submits that the son of the petitioner was arrested in Crime No. 171 of 2025 of Machavaram Police Station, Vijayawada, registered for the offence punishable under Section 318 (4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

6. In view of the submissions made by both learned counsel as the son of the petitioner has already been produced before the concerned Magistrate and as he is enlarged on bail, no orders are required to be passed in the present Writ Petition.

7. Accordingly, the Writ of Habeas Corpus is closed leaving it open to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedies available to her under law.

8. Pe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top