The High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, in a writ petition challenging criminal implicaiton, dismissed the matter as infructuous upon counsel's submission that the cause did not survive. No order as to costs.
The Writ Petition was dismissed as infructuous.
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 AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR '
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 31410 OF 2017 ,
Between:
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
...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 "b'e- pjeased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the Mature of writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent No.1 in inlpticating the petitioners in Cr.No.136/2017 of Jaggaiahpet police station, Jaggaiahpet, Krishna District as accused Nos. 3 to 5 even though the ‘»i.. * ^ petitioners are not claiming any rights over the property on the agreement of sale and they are nothing to do with the said property as arbitrary, illegal and violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.l to delete the names of the petitioners as accused Nos. 3 to 5 from FIR No.136/2017 of Jaggaiahpet police Station, Krishna District in the interest of justice.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 39129 OF 2017)
Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in thecircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.1 not to summon or harass the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners areaccusedNos. 3 to 5 in FIR No.136/2017 of Jaggaiahpet police station, Krishna District pending disposal of the Writ Petition in the interest of justice.
Counsel for the Petitioner(s)
:SRL P NAGENDRA REDDY.
Counsel for the Respondents No. 1 and 2 : GP FOR HOME (AP)
Counsel for the Respondent No. 3 : NONE APPEARED
The Court made the following: ORDER:
• ^
APHC010040942017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3310] (Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 31410/2017 Between: Medarametia Jakkaraiah and Others ..PETITIONER(S)
The Station House Officer, Jaggaiahpet ...RESPONDENT(S) Police Station and Others
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1.P NAGENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME(AP)
The Court made the following order:
Ms.K.Parvathi, learned counsel representing Mr.P.Nagendra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the cause in the writ petition does not survive and it has become infructuous, as such, no further orders are required in this matter.
Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition ISi dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending,shall stands closed.
SDI- K KASIRAO ACHARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// AgrSECTION OFFICER
To,
HIGH COURT
DATED:06/05/2024
ORDER
WP.No.31410 of 2017
2 1 DEC WS S'
\o
Current t»ection
£f_SPATC^t?-^
DISMISSING THE WP AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS
Medarametla Jakkaraiah and Others
The Station House Officer Jaggaiahpet police station
The State of Andhra Pradesh
Karnati Punnamma
DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
