CHILUKA CHANDRA SEKHAR v. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
WP/15712/2025 · 2025-07-13
R Raghunandan Rao, Sumathi Jagadam
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 22289 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 22289 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
APHC010314642025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3541] MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM WRIT PETITION NO: 15712/2025 Between:
1. CHILUKA CHANDRA SEKHAR, S/O CH DEEVENAIAH AGED 63 YEARS, OCC ADVOCATE , GENERAL SECRETARY OF ANDHRA PRADESH CIVIL LIBERTIES COMMITTEE (APCLC) SATHENAPALLI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH. ...PETITIONER AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRI. SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, SRIKAKULAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): 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 topleased to pass a writ,order or a direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS Under Article 226 of Constitution of India to produce the Detenues 1 and 2 who are the alleged Maoists and who are to be in the custody of the respondent state police of Andhra Pradesh state namely Tech Shankar @ Narayana Rao D-1 and Suresh D-2,
Majors, native persons of Bathupuram village of Kothuru Mandal of Srikakulam District may be produced in person before the court of law if they are required in any case or to set them free without harming their life and thereby uphold the rule of law and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. SRINIVASULU P Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL
The Court made the following order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the present Writ Petition. 2. The learned Government Pleader, appearing in the office of the learned Advocate General, has placed before this Court a statement given by the mother of the 1st alleged detenue and the neice of the 2nd alleged detenue, stating that they had not seen the detenues for the last 25-30 years. 3. In the circumstances, this Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. _______________________ R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
____________________ SUMATHI JAGADAM, J
Date: 14.07.2025 MJA
14
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
AND
THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE SUMATHI JAGADAM
WRIT PETITION NO: 15712 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
14.07.2025
MJA