Disposed

Budipalli Aswartha Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC13 Aug 2020WP/167/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition challenging an order under Section 145 Cr.P.C. initiated by police to join parties in a dispute over immovable property. The court observed that the prior order empowering such proceedings had expired after six months.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. The petitioners are at liberty to approach the court if respondents repeat the same.

Budipalli Aswartha Reddy, Vs The State… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶2

WRIT PETITION NO.167 of 2020

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the order in M.C.No.345 of 2019 dated 02-11-2019 passed by the 4^th respondent declare the same as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 300A of constitution of India and consequently set aside the same.

¶5

The case of the petitioners is that, they are the residents of Hindupur Town and they have purchased the house sites and open place in survey No.86-3 and 86-6 of Hindupur Municipality, Anantapur District from its original owners, way back in the year 1979 to 1982 for valid sale consideration through registered documents. The petitioners are questioning the action of the 5^th respondent in requiring the petitioners to attend police station everyday and preventing them to attend their daily work in connection with civil matter, illegally and the same is challenged before this court by way of W.P.No.16652/2019 and this court was pleased to pass order dated 24-10-2019 directing the 4^th respondent, not to call the petitioners to the police station without registering any crime. The 4^th respondent herein, issued proceedings under section 145(1) of Cr.P.C. by arraying these petitioners as “A party”. The 5^th respondent herein made a request on 25-10-2019, to the 4^th respondent to initiate proceedings under section 145(1) of Cr.P.C. to accommodate “B party” in proceedings. Accordingly, the 4^th respondent, without proper enquiry, issued orders in M.C.No.345 of 2019, dated 02-11-2019 under section 145(1) Cr.P.C. which is illegal and arbitrary.

¶6

¶7

During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners, re-iterated the contentions urged in the writ petition, whereas, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, requested to pass appropriate orders since, it is in accordance with law.

¶8

As seen from the material available on the record, a suit was filed by Smt D. Lakshmikanthamma, K. Babu, Koti Venkatesh, Sankarappa, V. Abusayeed, praying for several reliefs and it is pending before the Court of the Junior Civil Judge, Hindupur. Thus, the dispute with regard to the immovable property which the petitioners allegedly purchased is seized by the competent civil court. However, the 4^th respondent initiated the proceedings at the instance of the 5^th respondent, under section 145 of Cr.P.C. The 5^th respondent was prevented from interfering with the civil dispute in the earlier writ petition No.16652/2019 by order dated 24-102019. This order was impugned in the writ petition on 02-11-2019 and this order will remain in force only for a period of six (6) months and it is undisputed. Therefore, nothing remains in force as on date in view of the expiry of six (6) months prescribed under section 145 Cr.P.C. Hence, no further adjudication is required, however, in the event of the respondents repeating the same, the petitioners are at liberty to approach the court.

¶9

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission with the consent of both the counsel. No costs.

¶10

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall also stand closed.

¶11

__________________________________________ JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶12

Dated 13.08.2020 EPS

¶13

¶14

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

¶15

WRIT PETITION NO.167 of 2020

¶16

Dated 13.08.2020

¶17

EPS

¶18

Budipalli Aswartha Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Budipalli Aswartha Reddy, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lingisetty Naga Rajeswari, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Lingisetty Naga Rajeswari, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Karnati Rama Lakshamamma, Vs the State of Ap

Mandarapu Venkata Ramayya Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

A.V.V.B. Eeswara Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Avva Madhavi Latha at Yella Madhavi Latha, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh