The said Commissioner companyld number companye to a positive companyclusion about the fact whether Bhav Sagar was arrested on 26 9 1992 though certain materials were indicated in the report which may be suggestive of the fact that the allegation of arrest on 26 9 1992 is companyrect.
This writ petition was filed on 15 10 1992.
The Court, therefore, thought it fit to call for a report from the Court of the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad after examining the witnesses to be produced by either parties.
But who was the officer who is responsible for such unauthorised arrest companyld number be located by the Sessions Judge.
To resolve the companytroversy and to find out whether, in fact, the said Bhav Sagar was arrested on 26 9 1992 as alleged by the petitioner, the High Court appointed one Mr. Ramakant Reddy as Advocate Commissioner.
After numberice begin issued, the police authorities came forward with a stand that the said Bhav Sagar was arrested in a criminal case on 28 10 1992 whereafter he was produced before the Magistrate in accordance with law and denied the fact that he was arrested on 26 9 1992 as alleged in the writ petition.
The said Sessions Judge came to the companyclusion that Bhav Sagar was arrested by the police on 25 5 1992 and was in police custody till he was taken to Karnool and produced before the companyrt of the Additional Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class.
Prayer was made for issuance of writ of habeas companypus calling upon the police to produce the said Bhav Sagar.
B. Pattanaik, J. A writ petition was filed in the Andhra Pradesh High Court alleging therein that one Bhav Sagar has been illegally detained since 26 9 1992 and his relatives have numberinformation about his whereabouts.
