Dismissed

Ungarala Veera Venkata Satya Srinivasu v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC12 Jul 2021WP/12404/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Writ Petition challenged police inaction in filing a charge-sheet. The Court noted that the investigation was completed and a final report referring the case as 'false' was filed. Disposing of the petition, the Court directed the concerned Magistrate to issue a notice to the complainant to enable him to file a protest petition against the final report.

What did the court decide?

Petition closed; petitioner at liberty to file a protest petition upon receipt of notice from the Magistrate regarding the false report.

Ungarala Veera Venkata Satya Srinivasu Vs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY Writ Petition No.12404 of 2021

¶3

ORDER :

¶4

Aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the Station House Officer, Achanta Police Station, West Godavari District, in completing the investigation and filing the charge-sheet, in Crime No.134 of 2020 that was registered on 20.08.2020, the present Writ Petition has been filed seeking declaration that the action of the 2^nd respondent in not completing the investigation and filing charge-sheet in Crime No.134 of 2020 of Achanta Police Station, is illegal and unconstitutional and consequently, the petitioner sought direction to the 2^nd respondent to complete the investigation and file charge – sheet in the Court of law.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Asst. Government Pleader for Home for the official respondents 1 and 2.

¶6

1^st petitioner is the de facto complainant in Crime No.134 of 2020 of Achanta Police Station, West Godavari District. On a report lodged by him with the police on 20.08.2020, a case in the above crime was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 506 r/w.34 of IPC on the same day i.e. on 20.08.2020. Now the grievance of the writ petitioners is that in spite of registering the said crime long back on 20.08.2020 that the Investigating Officer

¶7

¶8

did not complete the investigation till now and did not file the charge-sheet.

¶9

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, would submit that the entire investigation in this case is completed and the final report was filed in the concerned Court on 03.07.2021 referring the case as ‘false’ and that the de facto complainant is not receiving the notice served on him by the police.

¶10

Therefore, it is now clear from the aforesaid submission of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home that the investigation in this case is completed and final report is also filed in the concerned Court. Therefore, the grievance of the writ petitioners has been redressed relating to completion of investigation and filing the final report. So, nothing survives in this Writ Petition for adjudication.

¶11

However, as the crime was referred as ‘false’ by filing a final report to that effect, as per the prescribed procedure of law, the concerned Magistrate has to issue a notice to the de facto complainant, who is the 1^st petitioner herein, informing him about referring the case as ‘false’ as per the final report submitted by the Investigating Officer to enable the 1^st petitioner to file a protest petition, if he feels aggrieved by the said final report. Therefore, the law has to take its

¶12

¶13

own course as per the said procedure, which has to be initiated by the concerned Magistrate.

¶14

Therefore, recording the aforesaid submission of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home that investigation in this case is completed and final report is also filed referring the case as ‘false’, this Writ Petition is closed. However, the 1^st petitioner is at liberty, being the de facto complainant in the said crime, to file a protest petition before the concerned Court on receipt of notice from the Court to oppose the said final report, if he feels aggrieved by the same. No costs.

¶15

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

¶16

________________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY Date:12.07.2021. cs

Ungarala Veera Venkata Satya Srinivasu v. State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ungarala Veera Venkata Satya Srinivasu v. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Hussain ATChiddu Master Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

T Gurikala Vs State of Ap

Avuthu Srinivasa Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Kayamkhani Sartaj Khanam Vs State of Ap

Mr. Samavedam surya teja Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh.

Katam Veera Bramhaiah, Vs State of Ap