The High Court of Andhra Pradesh disposed of a writ petition seeking direction to the police to include all complaint contents in an FIR and add specific offences. The court held that since a charge sheet was already filed by the police, no further orders were required.
No order as to costs and the writ petition is disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH::AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
A
>
D
V ^
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI
WRIT PETITION NO: 1007 OF 2019
Between:
C Vanaja, W/o. Cherukuri Venkata Ramana, Aged 40 years,OccHouseWife Jayanagar Colony, Tadipatri, Anantapuram District
...Petitioner
AND
...Respondents
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ,orderordirectionsmore particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaringtheaction of the Respondents in omitting a portion of the complaintdated07.12.2018and sections applicable thereto while registering the FIR No.301/2018 is arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to Criminal Procedure Code besides violating the rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to treat/include all the contents of the complaint dt.07.12.2018 given by the petitioner as part of the FIR and investigate the same by adding the offences U/S.378, 324 and 307 as disclosed from the complaint
lA NO: 1 OF 2019
Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in supportofthe petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 2nd respondenttoregistertheFIR in terms of the complaint dt.07.12.2018 given by thepetitioner
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI CHALLA GUNARANJAN
Counsel for the Respondents No.1 and 2: GP FOR HOME(AP)
The Court made the following: Order
^ ■
APHC010022052019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI BM0 [3368] (Special Original Jurisdiction) m
APHC010022052019
WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI WRIT PFTITION NO: 1007/2019
Between:
C.Vanaja
...PETITIONER
AND
The State of AP and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.CHALLAGUNARANJAN
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR HOME (AP)
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
under Article 226 of the Constitution of This Writ Petition
India is filed for the following relief;
“....to issue an appropriate writ order or directions more particularly in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in omitting a complaint dated 07.12.2018 and portion of the sections applicable thereto while registering the FIR
2
No. 301/2018 is arbitraiy illegal and contrary to Criminal Procedure Code besides violating the rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Articles 14 and21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2"*^' respondent to treat/include all the contentsof the complaint dt.07.12.2018 given by the petitioner as part of the FIR and investigate the same by adding the offences U/S.378, 324 and 307 as disclosed from the complaint... ”
- Heard learned counsel representing Sri Challa Gunaranjan
learned counsel for the petitioner.
- The writ petition was filed for declaration that the respondents omitted certain portion of the complaintandSections in the F.l.R.No.301 of 2018 and to direct them to include all the contents of the complaint.
- Now, in view of the submissions made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home that charge sheetwas already filed, no further orders are required to be passed in the
3
writ petition. The petitioner is at liberty to avail alternative remedy available in law, approaching the learned Magistrate for necessary relief.
- Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Thereshallbe no order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any,
pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
' To,
//TRUE COPY//
SD/- B. CHITTI JOSEPH assistant^egistrar S E IC E R
gsg
.* *
HIGH COURT
DATED: 18/09/2024
ORDER
WP.No.1007 of 2019
H FEB 2025 |)
,o ^Jj
. Current section
DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere to direct the police to include omitted portions of a complaint in the FIR while a charge sheet is already filed.
Whether the alternative remedy of approaching the learned Magistrate is available in this case.
C Vanaja
State of Andhra Pradesh
Station House Officer, Tadipatri Town
B V L N Chakravarthi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
