Writ petition alleging police interference with personal liberty by summoning petitioner to police station for counselling in a matrimonial dowry complaint. With a counter affidavit on record stating notice and counselling followed due process, the court found nothing survived for adjudication.
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)
TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH | TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR \j
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 24878 OF 2016
Between:
...Petitioner
AND
dist
...Respondents
226 of the Constitution of India praying that in Petition under Article the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,theHighCourtmay particularly one in the nature of be pleased to issue a Writ or order/s more action of the respondents 3 & 4 in Writ of Mandamus declaring the interfering with the personal liberty of the petitioner and summoning the otherwise than due process of law as being petitioner to the police station of Art.19, 21 of the Constitution of India and illegal, arbitrary and violative consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the petitioners life
' and liberty by summoning to police station withoutfollowingdueprocessof
r
•^l^w
LA. NO: 1 OF 2016 (WPMP. NO: 30713 OF 2016)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition,theHighCourtmaybe pleased to direct the 3rd and 4th respondents not tointerfere with the petitioner's life and liberty by summoning to policestationwithoutfollowing due process of law pending disposal of the above writpetition
Counsel for the Petitioner; SRI SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI
Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 4: 15516/GP FORHOME(AP)
Counsel for the Respondents No.5: 3063/N SUBBA RAO
The Court made the following; Order
IS5
APHCO10052252016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3310]
TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 24878/2016
Between:
Voruganti Anudeep, Spsr Nellore Dist ...PETITIONER
AND
Prl Secy Home Dept Hyderabad 4 Others and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
l.SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
l.GP FOR HOME (AP)
2.3063/N SUBBA RAO
3.15516/GP FOR HOME (AP)
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
when the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri A.EswarSai,learnedcounsel representing Sri V.Siva Prasad Reddy, learned counselforthepetitioner;learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondentsNo.l to 4 and Sri M.Devi Prasad, learned counsel representing Sri N.SubbaRao,learnedcounselfor the respondent No.5 are present.
To,
SD/- G. HELA NAIDU assistant registrar //TRUE COPY// Vv SECTIJi OFFICER
gsg
HIGH COURT
DATED: 26/03/2024
ORDER
WP.No.24878 of 2016
X , , SPP MW I
Secv^o" ^
Curr««''
CLOSING WP WITHOUT COSTS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the police respondents interfered with the petitioner's personal liberty by summoning him to the police station without due process of law
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Voruganti Anudeep
State of Andhra Pradesh, Home Department
The Superintendent of Police, Guntur
The Circle Inspector of Police, Piduguraila Police Station
The Sub Inspector of Police, Piduguraila Police Station
Gollapalli Sowjanya
K Manmadha Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
