Dismissed

Chakali Gokari v. the State of Ap

Andhra Pradesh HC19 Dec 2022WP/38847/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order under Section 145 Cr.P.C. The Court, upholding its own Single Judge's previous direction, advised that disputes under this section are better approached via revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C. unless extraordinary grounds exist.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; petitioners advised to file revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C.

Chakali Gokari Vs the State of Ap — Property and Title | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO WRIT PETITION No.38847 of 2022

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of Constitution of Indian for setting aside the order dated 19.03.2020 passed in M.C.No.41 of 2020 under Section 145 of Cr.P.C by the Executive Magistrate and Tahsildar, Midthur, Nandyal. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home has placed an order dated 06.09.2021, in W.P.No.18784 of 2021 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court.

¶4

The learned Single Judge had held that any order passed under Section 145 would be amenable to the revisional jurisdiction under Section 397(1) of Cr.P.C as well as writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India. However, since the remedy of revision under Section 397 is more efficacious, it would be appropriate that a petition under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. is filed rather than approaching this Court under Section 226 of Constitution of India.

¶5

Sri B.Ranga Swamy, learned counsel appearing

¶6

for the petitioners would rely upon a judgment of a Full

¶7

¶8

Bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in A.Dhaveethu

¶9

v. District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai and

¶10

Ors.¹ to contend that the aggrieved parties can move this Court under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. or under Articles 226/227 of Constitution of India.

¶11

While the judgment of the Full Bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras deserves the highest weight and respect being given to the said Judgment, it must also be noted that the judgment of a learned Single Judge of this Court is binding.

¶12

In the circumstances, while holding that parties can always approach this Court under the writ jurisdiction of this Court, it would be advisable and appropriate that revision is filed under Section 397 of Cr.P.C unless extraordinary grounds are pointed out.

¶13

In that view of the matter, this writ petition is dismissed leaving it open to the petitioners to approach this

¶14

1 2017 Cri L J 329

¶15

¶16

Court under its jurisdiction arising out of Section 397(1) of Cr.P.C. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶17

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, in this Writ

¶18

Petition shall stand closed.

¶19

____________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

¶20

19.12.2022 RKS

¶21

¶22

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶23

WRIT PETITION No.38847 of 2022

¶24

19.12.2022

¶25

RKS

Chakali Gokari v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chakali Gokari v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammad Moin Hasan Khan, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M.Nagaraju Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Gangarapu Ramanjaneya Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Taragalla Srinivasarao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

MadakamVenkateswaraRao, Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Bandaru Vinayak Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh