Allowed

Vagela Bhaghavan Das Atgangaram v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC10 Mar 2023WP/2266/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the Writ Petition declaring that continuing a suspect sheet against a petitioner, who was acquitted via compromise, violated Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. The judgment quashed and directed the closure of the suspect sheet.

What did the court decide?

The suspect sheet No. 190/KI/2017 opened against the petitioner is set aside, and Respondents 3 and 4 are directed to close the same.

Vagela Bhaghavan Das Atgangaram Vs the… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Andhra Pradesh HC (2023)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K SREENIVASA REDDY

¶2

Writ Petition No.2266 of 2023

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

The Writ Petition has been filed seeking to declare the suspect sheet No 190/KI/2017 of the year 2017 opened and continued against the Petitioner in the 4th Respondent Police Station with the orders of 3rd Respondent as violation of right to equality and right to freedom and liberty guaranteed under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently order the Respondents 3 and 4 to close the Suspect Sheet No.190/KI/2017 of the year 2017, against the petitioner.

¶5

According to the affidavit filed by the petitioner herein, there is one crime which was registered as against the petitioner in Crime No.52 of 2017 of Inaguduru police station for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 411 r/w 34 IPC. On 12.06.2017, the said case was registered and police after conducting investigation filed charge sheet and the same was numbered as C.C.No.24 of 2018 on the file of learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Machilipatnam. Thereafter, both the de facto complainant and petitioner herein

¶6

¶7

had compromised and by virtue of an order dated 14.07.2018,

¶8

the Lok Adalat bench acquitted the accused in respect of the said case in C.C.No.24 of 2018. Now, the respondent police opened suspect sheet as against the petitioner herein.

¶9

Counter filed by the 3^rd respondent herein concurred with the submission made by the petitioner herein to the extent that, the case in which the petitioner was involved ended in compromise with the complainant therein and thereafter, the Lok Adalat bench acquitted the petitioner herein.

¶10

According to the Andhra Pradesh Police Manual Order No. 600-1, the following persons should be classified as suspects and

¶11

History sheets shall be opened for them under the orders of the Superintendent of Police/ SPDO.

¶12

A. Persons once convicted under any section of the Indian penal code who are considered likely to commit crime again, and

¶13

B. Persons, not convicted, but believe to be addicted to crime

¶14

¶15

C. Communal and caste activists who are known to intigate, organize violence or spark off communal or caste riots.

¶16

D. Smugglers, hoarders, black-marketeers and for professional and grabbers.

¶17

Perusal of the said Standing Order goes to show that the persons who are once convicted under any of the Sections of the Indian Penal Code and if the police come to the conclusion that they are likely to commit the crime again; and those persons who are not convicted, but are believed to be addicted to crime, in respect of those persons, a suspect sheet can be opened. On a perusal of the Standing Order goes to show that the suspect sheet can be opened as against those persons if they are involved in any of the clauses that have been enumerated in the Standing Order. Going by the aforesaid Clause, the petitioner herein would not in any way fit into the Clause mentioned in the Standing Order. In the year 2018, the crime which was registered against the petitioner ended in acquittal, by virtue of compromise. According to the respondent police, there is no other crime registered as against the petitioner thereafter.

¶18

¶19

In view of the above circumstances, continuation of the suspect sheet as against the petitioner is nothing but restricting his movements and affecting his personal liberty.

¶20

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the Suspect Sheet No.190/KI/2017 of the year 2017 opened and continued against the petitioner in the 4^th respondent Police Station and the respondents 3 and 4 are hereby directed to close the above Suspect Sheet.

¶21

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.

¶22

______________________________ JUSTICE K. SREENIVASA REDDY

¶23

10.03.2023 ASR/DSV

¶24

¶25

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SREENIVASA REDDY

¶26

Writ Petition No.2266 of 2023

¶27

Date:10.03.2023

¶28

ASR/DSV

Vagela Bhaghavan Das Atgangaram v. the State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vagela Bhaghavan Das Atgangaram 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

Kalapala Nagalakshmi Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Dindi Chandra Rao, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Sri Veravalli Siva Nagendra Rao Vs the State of Ap

Bonthula Tarun Kumar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Kunjum Kamesh Dora Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

J.C.Ashmith Reddy Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh