Disposed

T.Raghu Babu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC20 Mar 2024WP/14525/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought protection from alleged police harassment over matrimonial disputes without any registered crime; an interim order had restrained the police subject to lawful procedure. The State later reported that the related dowry case (Cr.No.06/2016) ended in acquittal, and this Court recorded that submission and closed the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition closed recording the State's submission of acquittal in Cr.No.06/2016; no costs.

T.Raghu Babu Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Dowry and Cruelty | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) ^

¶2

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH

¶3

i a:
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR (V

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 14525 OF 2016

¶7

Between:

¶8

T.Raghu Babu, S/o Narasimha Charyulu, Age: 59 years, Occ: Advocate, R/o Moosarambagh, Dilshuknagar, Hyderabad

¶9

Smt.T.Laxmi, W/o Raghu Babu, Age; 56 years, Occ;^House hold R/o Moosarambagh, Dilshuknagar, Hyderabad

¶10

Smt.R.Sandhya Rani, W/o Sampath Kumar, D/o T.Raghu Babu, Age; 32 years, Occ; House Wife, R/o Moosarambagh, Dilshuknagar, Hyderabad

¶11

K.Vishnu Priya, W/o K.V.Ujjwal, D/o T.Raghu Babu, Age: 30 years, Occ: Private Employee R/o Moosarambagh, Dilshuknagar, Hyderabad

¶12

...PETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

The State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by Principal Secretary, Home Department, Hyderabad

¶15

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Women Police Station, Machilipatnam, Krishna District.

¶16

The Inspector of Police, Women Police Station, Machilipatnam,^Krishna District

¶17

...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue writ or direction preferably Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in interfering in matrimonial disputes of petitioner's without following the due process of law and insisting to attend

¶18

the police station for settlement as illegal arbitrary and violative of 14, and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the Respondents not to interfere with the personal liberty, constantly calling to police station and seeking arrest without registering a crime against^the Petitioners in the interest of justice.

¶19

LA. NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP. NO: 18082 OF 2016)

¶20

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstances} stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents not to interfere with personal liberty by constantly calling to police station and seeking arrest without registering a crime against the Petitioners in the interest of justice.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioners; SRI SREENIVASA RAO RAVULAPATI Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

APHC010333582016

¶23

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶24

[3310]

¶25

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶26

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶27

PRESENT

¶28

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶29

WRIT PETITION NO: 14525/2016

¶30

Between;

¶31

T. Raghu Babu and Others

¶32

...PETITIONER(S)

¶33

AND

¶34

...RESPONDENT{S) The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others

¶35

The Court made the following Order:

¶36

This Writ Petition is filed, under Article 226 of the^{ConstitutionofIndia,}

¶37

seeking the following relief;

¶38

"...to issue writ or direction preferably Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents in interfering in matrimonial disputes of petitioners' without following the due process of law and insisting to attend the police station for settlement as illegal arbitrary and violative of Article^14and21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the^Respondents not to interfere with the personal liberty constantly^{callingtopolice} station and seeking arrest without registering a crime^againstthe Petitioners in the interest of justice...."

¶39

Learned Assistant Government 2. None appeared for the petitioners.

¶40

Pleader for Home appearing for the official respondents^ispresent.

¶41

¶42

This Court granted interim order vide order dated 26.04.2016:

¶43

The respondent police-authorities are directed not to interfere with the life and liberty of the petitioners unless their examination/interrogation is warrantedⁱⁿ relation to any criminal investigation and even if so, they shall strictly follow the procedure prescribed by law.

¶44

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home furnished a copy of Written Instructions issued by Inspector of Police, Disha Mahila P.S., Machilipatnam, dated 19.12.2023 and submitted that a crime was registered vide Cr.No.06/2016, U/s.498(A), IPC and Sections 3 & 4 DP Act of Woman P.S. and the case was ended in acquittal on the file of ll-Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Machilipatnam, dated 19.03.2019. Therefore, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home requests this Court to record the same and close the Writ Petition.

¶45

Recording the submission of learned Assistant Government Pleader and upon perusing the written instructions, the Writ Petition is closed.

¶46

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶47

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand

¶48

closed.

¶49

SD/- U. SRIDEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶50

//TRUE COPY//

¶51

To,

¶52

One CC to Sri Sreenivasa Rao Ravulapati, Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT] 3. Three CD Copies.

ssb

HIGH COURT

DATED:21/03/2024

ORDER

g 0 <1 DEC 202'!
. Current Section

¶58

WP.No.14525 Of 2016

¶59

CLOSING THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS

T.Raghu Babu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Raghu Babu 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

Smt. Mohammad Vasima Fathima, Vizianagaram Dist Vs Prl Secy, Dept. of Home, Hyderabad and 5 Others

Shaik Khader Basha, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Syed Noorullah Hussain alias Noor Baba, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. Duvvi Pushpa Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Rahul Kumar Jain Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its

Sri K.Gangadhara Shrama, Vs The state of Andhra Pradesh