APHC010636172025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3558]

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION No.32896 of 2025 Between:

1. T AMMISHETTY PALLAVI, W/O TAMMISHETTY SAI, AGED 27 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWIFE, R/O VISWANADHARAOPET BOGOLU VILLAGE AND MANDAL, SPSR NELLORE DIST.

...PETITIONER AND

1. T HE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY. HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

2. T HE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ANAKAPALLI, ANAKAPALLE DISTRICT.

3. T HE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, NARSIPATNAM P.S., ANAKAPALLE DISTRICT.

...RESPONDENT(S):

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. S. V. INDIRA Counsel for the Respondent(S):

1. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following:

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE TUHIN KUMAR GEDELA WRIT PETITION No.32896 of 2025 O R D E R: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Cheekati Manavendranath Roy Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader attached to the office of the learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents.

2. The corpus, by name Chowta Abhishek, is the brother of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that on 22.11.2025 at 11.00 p.m., some people claiming to be the police personnel took the corpus into their custody at Lambasingi and when the friends who are with the corpus questioned them regarding their identity, they disclosed that they belong to Narsipatnam Police Station. It is stated that the friends of the corpus informed about the said fact to the parents of the corpus and when the parents of the corpus went to Narsipatnam Police Station on 23.11.2025 at 7.00 a.m. to know the reasons for the arrest of the corpus, they did not find the corpus in the said police station. Therefore, alleging that the 3^rd respondent-police have illegally detained the corpus, who is the brother of the petitioner, since 22.11.2025, the instant writ petition has been filed for habeas corpus seeking direction to the police to produce the corpus before the Court and to set him at liberty.

3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, on instructions, submits that the Narsipatnam police did not take the corpus into custody on 22.11.2025 or at any point of time and the corpus was never in the custody of Narsipatnam police. He further submits, on instructions, that the corpus was a rowdy sheeter and a rowdy sheet was earlier opined against him in Vedullapalli Police Station and the corpus was only summoned to Vedullapalli Police Station on 30.11.2025 for the purpose of counseling and thereafter, he was sent away and he is not in the illegal custody of any police as alleged by the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also now fairly concedes that the corpus is now at liberty and he is not in the custody of any police.

5. Even as can be seen from the pleadings of the petitioner, the petitioner is not certain that the Narsipatnam police have taken the corpus into their custody on 22.11.2025. It is only her case that some persons, claiming to be the police personnel, took him into custody and when the friends of the corpus questioned them regarding their identity, they disclosed that they are Narsipatnam police. Therefore, it is obvious that some unknown persons whose identity is not known to the corpus have taken the corpus into their custody, as per the pleadings in the writ petition.

6. At any rate, as it is now stated that the corpus is now at liberty and that he is not in the custody of the police, recording the said submission made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, which fact is confirmed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is closed. If the police require the presence of the corpus for any purpose, they have to follow the due process of