Durgeshwari, v. The State Of Telangana,

[ 344e ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

(Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENW FIRST DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE B.R.MAOHUSUDHAN RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 5189 OF 2025 Between:

Durgeshwari, Wo Nandkishore, Aged about.23 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o. 13-11 23512931 a195, Mangalhat, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad, 500006 Cell no . 7 842402861 ...PETITIONER AND The State of Telangana, Rep., by it's Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The Director General Prohibition and excise of Police, Hyderabad. State of Telangana,

3. The Commissioner of Prohibition and excise of Police, Hyderabad. State of Telangana,

4. The Station House Officer, Dhoolpet prohibition anb excise, Police Station, ..,RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF HABEAUS CORPUS to direct the respondents to produce the detenue Petitioners husband namely Nandkishore S/o Shivaraj Singh Aged about 30 years, occ. Private employee R/o 13-1-12351293/A,/95 Mangalhat, Dhoolpet, Hydreabad, before this Hon'ble Court and set him at liberty. I Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI MOHD ARFATH MASOOD Counsel for the Respondents: SPL.GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER

I THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA AND THE HON'BLE JUSTICE B.R. MADHUSUDHAN RAO Writ Petition No.5189 of 2o25 ORDER:

Most of the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner online cannot be deciphered. The only material submission which we could hear is that the petitioner seeks to withdraw the writ Petition.

2.

The Learned Special Government pleader submits that the Writ Petition is most frivolous and hands up written instructions which states that the petitioner did not instruct any advocate to file a Habeas Corpus pelition using the petitioner,s name. It is also submitted that the alleged detenu was at his house as on 20.O2.2025. The photographs of the petitioner along with the detenu are enclosed with the written instructions. we note that the writ petition was filed on 19.O2.2O25.

3.

Considering the submissions made on behalf of the respondents, W.P.No.S189 of 2O2S is dismissed. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

SD/.S.MALLIKARJUNA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,. '

SECTION OFFICER To, / //TRUE COPY// One CC to SRI MOHD ARFATH MASOOD, Advocate. [OPUC] 1.

Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUTI Two CD Copies.

2.

3.

BSK (r ) --l

1.

HIGH COURT DATED:21 10211?025 1 rte ST^ IA

ORDER

io 21 t1[P,2[6 z C, WP.No.5189 of 2025 t .JEsPArr'.

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS -@ &tt,