Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Gudivada Sombabu, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 20 August, 2025
Author: R Raghunandan Rao
Bench: R Raghunandan Rao
APHC010138152025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3529]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF AUGUST
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 7315/2025
Between:
1. GUDIVADA SOMBABU,, S/O.LATE SURIDEMUDU , AGED ABOUT 53
YEARS, OCC- AGRICUTURE LABOUR , D.NO.I-48, R/O. GUDIVADA
VILLAGE, VEPADA MANDAL, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
2. THE SPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT, AT
VIZIANAGARAM .
3. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTHAVALASA P.S.,
KOTHAVALASA, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT.
4. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PRISONS AND CORRECTIONAL
SERVICES, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH , AT
VIJAYAWADA, NTR KRISHNA DISTRICT.
5. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL PRISON, VISAKHAPATNAM
,VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT.
6. BODDU DEVI, W/O. RONGALI BALAJI, OCC- GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEE, WOMAN SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE,VALLAMPUDI
P.S., VIZIANAGARAM 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
2
RRR, J & TCDS, J
W.P.No.7315 of 2025
pleased tomay be pleased to issue a appropriate Writ Order or direction more
particularly one in the nature of writ of Habeas Corpus or any other
appropriate writ (a) declaring the arrest of Accused No.l- Gudivada Mohan,
S/o. Sombabu and Accused No.7-Gudivada Santosh Kumar, S/o. Sombabu
in Crime No. 23 of 2025 as illegal and violative of Section 47(1) of
B.N.S.,2023 and Article 22 (1) and (5) of the Constitution of India (b)
declaring the remand of Accused No 1 and 7 vide order dated 13-3- 2025 in
Crime No. 23 of 2025 on the file of S.H.O. Vallampudi P.S., Vizianagaram
District passed by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kothavalasa,
Vizianagaram District, (c) Direct the Respondent No. 4 to cause enquiry on
using Criminal force. Custodial torture on the Accused No 1 and 7 in Crime
No. 23 of 2025 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
may be please to constitute a Committee of Doctors to examine the Accused
No 1 and 7 in Crime No. 23 of 2025 and file report before this Hon’ble Court
and pass
IA NO: 2 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
Please to receive the additional material papers filed herewith and treat the
additional papers as a part and parcel of the main Writ Petition and pass
IA NO: 3 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
please pass orders under Order XI Rule 14 of C.P.C, to direct the
Respondent No.4 and 5 to produce the records/register containing the Names
of Visitors, additional visitors who had meeting with accused/prisoners in
connection with Crime No. 23 of 2025 and the C.C.TV footage of the Meeting
between Visitors, additional visitors with accused / prisoners in connection
Crime No. 23 of 2025 on the date 15.03.2025 and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. B SESIBUSHAN RAO
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. THE ADVOCATE GENERAL
3
RRR, J & TCDS, J
W.P.No.7315 of 2025The Court made the following order:
Heard Sri B. Sesibhushan Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned Government Pleader, appearing in the office of the learned
Advocate General, for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition seeking a Writ of
Habeas Corpus, declaring the arrest of the detenues as well as the order of
remand passed against the detenues to be illegal and for a further direction to
the 4th respondent – Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services, to
cause an enquiry on the use of criminal force and custodial torture on the
detenues, while they were in Central Prison, Visakhapatnam.
3. According to the petitioner, Crime No.23 of 2025 was registered
against various persons, including his two sons, by the 6th respondent on false
grounds, as his sons had questioned the right of the 6th respondent in
assaulting them at around 8.30 P.M. on 11.03.2025. The petitioner further
contended that both his sons, who were the detenues in the present case, had
been arrested and remanded to judicial custody, after which they were shifted
to the Central Prison, Visakhapatnam, on 13.03.2025. The petitioner states
that on 15.03.2025, he met both his sons in a mulakat at the Central Prison,
Visakhapatnam and was informed that his sons had been beaten up by the
prison warders, from day one of the judicial custody and they were not being
given adequate drinking water, on the pretext that they had attacked a Police
Officer.
4
RRR, J & TCDS, J
W.P.No.7315 of 2025
4. The version of the respondents was that a festival was being
celebrated, in Sri Venugopalaswamy Temple, at Gudivada Village of Vepada
Mandal, on 11.03.2025, during which certain persons were misbehaving, and
the 6th respondent, who was on Bandobasth duty, tried to intervene and
control this misbehavior. At that stage these persons, including the detenues,
had assaulted her and used foul language against her. On account of the said
assault, Crime No.23 of 2025 had been registered on 11.03.2025 under the
provisions of Sections 132, 121(1), 74, 307, 79, 49 r/w 3 (5) of BNS and the
accused persons were arrested and produced before the Magistrate who had
remanded them to judicial custody. After the said order of remand had been
passed against these persons, including the detenues, they were shifted to
the Central Prison, Visakhapatnam. The respondents took the specific plea
that the petitioner had not met the detenues on 15.03.2025 and as such, the
complaint, that the detenues had informed him about the ill-treatment in the
Central Prison, cannot be accepted.
5. In order to ascertain whether the petitioner had met the detenues,
the Authorities of the Central Prison were required to produce the Mulakat
slips. These Mulakat slips were produced before this Court.
6. A perusal of these Mulakat slips would show that the sisters of
the detenues had visited and met the detenues on 15.03.2025, while the
Mulakat slips issued for the petitioner, shows that the petitioner had met his
nephew, on 15.03.2025, who was another under-trial prisoner.
5
RRR, J & TCDS, J
W.P.No.7315 of 2025
7. Sri B. Seshibushan Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, would
contend that a group of relatives had visited the Central Prison,
Visakhapatnam, to meet the persons who had been remanded in Crime No.23
of 2025 and the Prison Authorities had randomly allotted names of under trial
prisoners, against each Mulakat slips, though the visitors were allowed to
meet the under trials, whose names may not have been mentioned in the
mulakat slips. Though the Mulakat slips show that the petitioner was present
in the Central Prison, Visakhapatnam, on 15.03.2025, and had met one of the
under trials in Crime No.23 of 2025, this Court cannot come to a firm
conclusion that the petitioner had in fact, met his two sons, who were the
detenues in the present case.
8. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner was
that the detenues had been ill-treated in the prison. In such circumstances, the
question of whether the detenues informed the petitioner about such
ill-treatment on 15.03.2025, cannot have relevance and this Court would have
to look into the question of whether such ill-treatment had occurred. The
respondents have also produced proformas for health screening of prisoners
on admission to Jail, which was done on 16.03.2025. In these proformas, the
Medical Officer did not find any injury which requires further treatment. In
these circumstances, it would not be appropriate for this Court to draw any
adverse interference.
6
RRR, J & TCDS, J
W.P.No.7315 of 2025
9. Accordingly, this Court does not find any reason to interfere in the
matter and the Writ Petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner or
the detenues to avail of such remedies as they may deem fit, as this Court is
unable to arrive at any finding of fact, which is necessary before any Writ can
be issued. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
_______________________
R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
________________
T.C.D. SEKHAR, J
Date: 20.08.2025
MJA
7
RRR, J & TCDS, J
W.P.No.7315 of 2025
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D. SEKHAR
WRIT PETITION No.7315 of 2025
(per Hon’ble Sri Justice R. Raghunandan Rao)
Dt: 20.08.2025
MJA