Dismissed

Pedda Appalanaidu v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC10 Aug 2022WP/24156/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition for mandamus challenging inaction in investigation, the Court examined submissions stating the investigation was completed and the case referred as civil. The Court closed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to file a protest petition before the Magistrate. Status quo ante.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition closed. Petitioner directed to file protest petition before the Magistrate.

Pedda Appalanaidu Vs the State of Andhra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY WRIT PETITION No.24156 of 2022

¶2

ORDER:-

¶3

This Writ Petition for mandamus is filed to declare the action of respondent 3-Station House Officer of Sarubujjili Police Station, Srikakulam District, in not completing the investigation in Crime No.84 of 2019, registered on 14.05.2019, as illegal and consequently sought direction to respondent 3 to file final report before the competent Court.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.

¶5

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that the entire investigation in the above crime was completed and that the case was referred as civil in nature and a final report to the effect was also filed in the concerned Court by the investigation officer after obtaining necessary order to that effect from the Sub Divisional Police Officer, who is superior officer.

¶6

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home has also placed on record, the written instructions received by him to that effect from the Circle Inspector of Police, Sarubujjili Police Station, Srikakulam District.

¶7

Therefore, as the entire investigation in this case is completed and final report is also filed, it cannot be said that there is any inaction on the part of the investigation officer in completing the investigation. However, there is nothing to indicate from the

¶8

¶9

written instructions that notice of the fact that the case was referred as civil in nature was served on the de facto complainant or not. In fact, the Court in which the final report was filed has to also issue notice to the de facto complainant to enable him to file protest petition.

¶10

Therefore, recording the aforesaid submission made by learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on written instructions, the Writ Petition is closed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file a protest petition before the learned Magistrate, if he feels aggrieved by the said final report.

¶11

Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in the Writ Petition, shall stand closed.

¶12

______________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

¶13

Date: 10.08.2022 ASH

¶14

¶15

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

¶16

WRIT PETITION No.24156 of 2022

¶17

Date: 10-08-2022

¶18

ASH

Pedda Appalanaidu v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pedda Appalanaidu 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akula Naresh, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Shaik Silar, Vs the State of Ap Ad 3 Others

Pokuri Siva, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Velaga Bhaskara Rao Vs The Superintendent of Police

Varapula Jogiraju at Raja Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Kota Chandra Shekhar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh