A witness in an ACB corruption investigation alleged harassment, detention and forcible seizure of his cash and title documents by ACB officers. Investigation was completed and a charge sheet laid; the petitioner was not made an accused. The writ petition was disposed of directing police to follow due process.
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 TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI
WRIT PETITION NO: 3156 OF 2019
Between:
Sri Darla Vijaya Kumar, S/o. Anand Rao, Aged about 39 years, SC Mala Dalit, Occ Business, R/o. D.No.61-25/4-4/5, Potta Road, Eenadu Colony, Ramalingeswara Nagar, Vijayawada-13
...PETITIONER
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 be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ or order or direction, more particularly, one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring that the action of the Respondents 3 to 6, in calling the petitionertotheACBOffice situated in RTC Administrative Block, Vijayawada and harassing the petitioner, forcing the petitioner, threatening the petitioner with dire consequences to speak against himself and also againstthedelinquent officer and forcibly seized the petitioner's cash andseveraltitledocuments highhandedly, illegally and further calling the petitioner frequentlytothe ACB Office under the guise of investigation as witness and detaining the petitioner from morning to evening and even calling in the midnights under the investigation pertaining to CR.No.01/RCA-CIU-ACB/2019 of Anti Corruption Bureau, CIU, Vijayawada, A.P., without prior notices or summons by following due process of law and as contemplatedunderthe Code of Criminal procedure code, further threatening the petitioner to implicate in false cases is illegal, arbitrary, unjust, capricious and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 19 (1) (g), 20(3) of the Constitution of India and against the principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the Respondents not to call the petitioner to the ACB Office,andharassthe petitioner, detain the petitioner without following due process of Law in the interest of Justice.
lA NO: 1 OF 2019
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 Respondents 2 to 6, not to call petitioner to the ACB Office and harass the petitioner, detain the petitioner under the guise of investigation and enquiry pertaining to CR.No.01/RCA-CIU-ACB/2019 of Anti Corruption Bureau, CIU, Vijayawada, A.P., without following due process of Law in the interest of Justice.
^ Counsel for the Petitloner(s): SRI. CHALASANI AJAYKUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 6: M/s A GAYATHRIREDDY Standing Counsel for ACB cum Spl. PP
The Court made the following: ORDER
APHC010070492019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
[3368]
n.
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI
WRIT PETITION NO: 3156/2019
Between:
...PETITIONER
Darla Vijaya Kumar
AND
The State of AP and Others ...RESPONDENT{S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.CHALASANI AJAY KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent{S):
1 .A GAYATHRI REDDY Standing Counsel for ACB cum Spl.
PP
The Court made the following:.
ORDER:
This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India is filed for the following relief;
'' ... to issue an appropriate Writ, or order or direction
more particularly one in the nature of Writ of
Mandamus declaring that the action of the
Respondents 3 to 6 in calling the petitioner to the ACB
<br>
2
Office situated in RTC Administrative Block Vijayawada and harassing the petitioner forcing the petitioner threatening the petitioner with dire consequences to speak against himself and also against the delinquent officer and forcibly seized the petitioners cash and several title documents highhandedly, Illegally and further calling the petitioner frequently to the ACB Office under the guise of investigation as witness and detaining the petitioner from morning to evening and even calling in the midnights under the investigation pertaining to CR.No.01/RCA-CIU-ACB/2019 of Anti Corruption Bureau CIU Vijayawada A P without prior notices or summons by following due process of law and as contemplated under the Code of Criminal procedure code further threatening the petitioner to implicate' in false cases is illegal, arbitrary unjust capricious and violative of Articles 14, 21 and 19(1)(g) 20(3) of the Constitution of India and against the principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the Respondents not to call the petitioner to the ACB Office and harass the petitioner detain the petitioner without following due process of Law in the interest of Justice and pass...’’
- Heard Sri Chalasani Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner appeared through virtual mode.
- Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as on the date, police completed investigation and not summoningthe
3
petitioner to the police station and therefore writ petition may be
disposed of.
- Smt.A.Gayathri Reddy, learned Standing Counsel-cumSpecial Public Prosecutor for ACB appeared throughvirtualmode would submit that in this case police completed investigationand laid charge sheet before the concerned Court. She would further submit that at the relevant point in time, the petitionerwascalled for enquiry with regard to the property ..purchased in his name by the accused officer and as of now the petitioner was not arrayed as accused in the charge sheet.
- Considering the above facts and circumstances, thisCourt is of the opinion that writ petition can be disposedofasnofurther orders are required at this stage.
- Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Thereshallbe no orders as to costs.
i* t.
4
As a sequel thereto, the miscellaneous petitions, if any,
pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
//TRUE COPY// SD/- G. HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
To,
Ir SECTION OFFICER
AL
■ pp®A*^*°M/SAGayathri PP Advocate [OPUCJ Reddy Standing Counsel for ACB cum Spl.
HIGH COURT
DATED: 10/09/2024
ORDER
WP.No.3156 of 2019
DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether ACB officials acted unlawfully in repeatedly summoning, detaining and seizing property of a witness during investigation without due process
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Sri Darla Vijaya Kumar
The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Anti Corruption Bureau
The Joint Director, Anti Corruption Bureau, Vijayawada
The Additional S.P. ACB, C.I.U, A.P., Vijayawada
Sudershan Reddy, Circle Inspector of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau C.I.U., Vijayawada
Ch. Anjeneyulu, Inspector of Police, Anti Corruption Bureau C.I.U., Vijayawada
B V L N Chakravarthi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
