The CBI’s Andhra Pradesh unit was made a respondent. It was directed to submit a preliminary report. Until then, the process of presenting Reddy before a magistrate has been stayed.
Published Sep 27, 2025 | 12:47 PM ⚊ Updated Sep 27, 2025 | 12:47 PM
Andhra Pradesh High Court. (Supplied)
Synopsis: There have been two such separate court interventions. The Andhra Pradesh High Court ordered a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the alleged illegal arrest of activist Kunchala Savindra Reddy. In Guntur, another activist, Sai Bhargav, was released after the court rapped the police for making arrests without evidence.
Police excesses against social media activists in Andhra Pradesh continue unabated, drawing strong judicial rebukes.
There have been two such separate court interventions. The Andhra Pradesh High Court ordered a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe into the alleged illegal arrest of activist Kunchala Savindra Reddy. In Guntur, another activist, Sai Bhargav, was released after the court rapped the police for making arrests without evidence.
Together, the cases highlight a disturbing pattern of harassment against government critics, particularly those linked to the opposition YSR Congress Party. They also expose growing tensions over free speech and online expression in the state.
The High Court acted on a habeas corpus petition filed by Savindra Reddy’s wife, Lakshmi Prasanna. She alleged that her husband was unlawfully detained without following due process.
A division bench described the police action as “atrocious and highly objectionable.” It said there was prima facie evidence of illegality and pointed to contradictions in the reports filed by Tadepalli police.
According to the remand report, Savindra Reddy was arrested at 8:30 p.m. on 22 September. But mediators’ statements were recorded at 7:30 p.m., an hour earlier. Telecom records showed his phone was switched off at 6:21 p.m. near Tadepalli. His wife filed a police complaint around 7 p.m.
The bench noted that police first denied having him in custody but later produced him before a magistrate. Such conflicting statements, it said, destroyed their credibility.
“Police cannot arbitrarily curtail an individual’s liberty. Their actions here are deeply objectionable. That is why we intervene under Article 226 of the Constitution,” the bench observed.
The court also pointed out that Supreme Court guidelines were flouted. Officers were not in uniform when they made the arrest. “Normally, we do not probe such details,” the bench said, “but the conduct here is shocking.”
The CBI’s Andhra Pradesh unit was made a respondent. It was directed to submit a preliminary report. Until then, the process of presenting Reddy before a magistrate has been stayed.
Evidence, including cell tower data, CCTV footage from Tadepalli police station, the remand report, and the wife’s complaint, will be handed over to the CBI. The next hearing is scheduled for 13 October.
In the second case, a Guntur court released activist Sai Bhargav on 25 September. He had been arrested over a social media post allegedly distorting the Chief Minister’s remarks on urea shortage.
The court reprimanded police for making arrests without evidence. It ordered a medical examination after Bhargav alleged custodial assault. Finding no proof against him, the court ordered his release on a surety of ₹25,000 and personal guarantees.
(Edited by Sumavarsha)
