The High Court closed a writ petition alleging police harassment in a matrimonial dispute. Relying on police instructions showing efforts to settle the matter and evidence of dowry complaints, the court found no harassment and disposed of the petition without costs.
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.
a
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 35690 OF 2015
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 be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Official Respondents to harass the petitioners and their family members in a matrimonial matter as arbitrary, illegal, unfair mis-use of power, biased, unconstitutional, against the principles of natural justice and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd and 3rd Respondents not to harass the petitioners and their family members in a matrimonial matter.
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP. NO: 45856 OF 20151
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 Police i.e., 2nd and 3rd Respondents not to harass the petitioners and their family members in a matrimonial matter and not to interfere in a matrimonial matter, pending disposal of the above writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI M KISHORE BABU (BEING NOT PRESENT)
Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3: ASST. GP FOR HOME
Counsel for the Respondents 4 to 6 : NONE
The Court made the following: ORDER
[3310]
APHC010125392015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 35690/2015
Between:
P.lakshmi & Another, and Others
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
Secy Home Dept Hyd 5 Others and Others Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
...RESPONDENT(S)
1.M KISHORE BABU
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR HOME (AP)
2.15516/GP FOR HOME (AP)
The Court made the following Order:
This writ petition is filed declaring the action of the official re spondents to harass the petitioners and their family members in a matrimonial matter, as illegal and arbitrary.
earlier occasion also, none 2. None appeared for the petitioners. On an appeared for the petitioners. Heard learned AssistantGovernmentPleader for Home appearing for the official respondents.
- On hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home furnished a copy of Written Instructions issued by Sub-Inspector of Police, N.G.Padu police station, Prakasam district, dated 13.11.2015 and submits that the facts of the case are that on 11.10.2015, the 6th respondent lodged a complaint to the Station House Officer, Nagulappalapadu police station, prakasam district, stating that the l^t and 2^^ petitioners and their family members agreed to perform the marriage of the complainant with the 2"d petitioner and demanded dowry and in this connection, engagement was also celebrated. Later, the petitioners demanded further dowiy from the complainant or else the marriage will not be performed. The compaint requested the police to call the petitioners and settle the matter. Basing on that, the 3--^ respondent-police called both the parties for enquiry and on 19.10.2015, both the parties approached and stated that they would settle the matter before the elders and the same was entered in the General Diary. He further submits that on 09.11.2015, the 4th respondent lodged similar complaint to the Station House Officer, Nagulappalapadu police station. prakasam district and requested to take necessary action. Basing on the said complaint, a case in Cr.No.78 of 2015, dated 09.11.2015 under Sections 420 IPC and Section 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act was registered against the petitioners as A2 and A1 on the file of 3''^ respondent police station and investigation was taken up by examining five witnesses. After completion of rnvestigation, an appropriate report will be submitted before the concerned Court.
- Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home further submits that the respondent police never harassed the petitioners and their family members in a matrimonial dispute at any point of time, He further submits that on 02.10.2015, the respondent summoned the petitioners to the police station for settlement and again on 03.10.2015, the petitioners were directed to present in the office of the 2"d respondent for the purpose of marriage of the 2”d petitioner with the G*** respondent are false allegations. He further submits that the respondents 2 and 3 never tried to settle the dispute with the petitioners and the respondents 4 to 6 herein as alleged by the petitioners herein.
- In view of the submission s made by learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home and upon perusing the written instructions issued by respondent police, this Court is of the view that. nothing survives in the present writ petition for any further adjudication.
By observing the same, the writ petition is closed.
There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel. miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand
closed.
To,
Sd/- V. SAVITHRI GOWRI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR c ——— SECTION OFFICER
//TRUE COPY// ———
Guntur District.
Prakasam District.
Madhu
HIGH COURT
DATED:1 3/03/2024
ORDER
WP.No.35690 of 2015
THE WP WITHOUT COSTS CLOSING
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 35690 OF 2015
Between:
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015fWPMP. NO: 45856 OF 20151
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 Police i.e., 2nd and 3rd Respondents not to harass the petitioners and their family members in a matrimonial matter and not to interfere in a matrimonial matter, pending disposal of the above writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI M KISHORE BABU (BEING NOT PRESENT)
Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3: ASST. GP FOR HOME
Counsel for the Respondents 4 to 6 : NONE
The Court made the following: ORDER
APHC010125392015
[3310]
m
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 35690/2015
Between:
P.lakshmi & Another, and Others
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
Secy Home Dept Hyd 5 Others and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1.M KISHORE BABU
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1.GP FOR HOME (AP)
2.15516/GP FOR HOME (AP)
The Court made the following Order:
This writ petition is filed declaring the action of the official respondents to harass the petitioners and their family members in a matrimonial matter, as illegal and arbitrary.
- None appeared for the petitioners. On an earlier occasionalso,none appeared for the petitioners. Heard learned AssistantGovernmentPleader for Home appearing for the official respondents.
- On hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home furnished a copy of Written Instructions issued by Sub-Inspector of Police, N.G.Padu police station, Prakasam district, dated 13.11.2015 and submits that the facts of the case are that on 11.10.2015, the 6’^^ respondent lodged a complaint to the Station House Officer, Nagulappalapadu police station prakasam district, stating that the l^t and 2"^ petitioners and their family members agreed to perform the marriage of the complainant with the 2^^ petitioner and demanded dowry and in this connection, engagement was also celebrated. Later, the petitioners demanded further dowry from the complainant or else the marriage will not be performed. The compaint requested the police to call the petitioners and settle the matter. Basing on that, the respondent-police called both the parties for enquiry and on 19.10.2015, both the parties approached and stated that they would settle the matter before the elders and the same was entered in the General Diary. He further submits that on 09.11.2015, the 4th respondent lodged similar complaint to the Station House Officer, Nagulappalapadu police station. prakasam district and requested to take necessary action. Basing on the said complaint, a case Cr.No.78 of 2015, dated 09.11.2015 under Sections 420 IPC and Section 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act was registered against the petitioners as A2 and A1 on the file of 3^^ respondent police station and investigation was taken up by examining five witnesses. After completion of investigation, an appropriate report will be submitted before the concerned Court.
' the respondent police never harassed the petitioners and their family members in a matrimonial dispute at any point of time. He further submits
that on 02.10.2015, the 3rd respondent summoned the petitioners to the
police station for settlement and again on 03.10.2015, the petitioners were
directed to present in the office of the 2"d respondent for the purpose of marriage of the 2nd petitioner with the 6^1 respondent are false allegations,
He further submits that the respondents 2 and 3 never tried to settle the
dispute with the petitioners and the respondents 4 to 6 herei n as alleged by the petitioners herein.
- In view of the submissions made by learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home and upon perusing the written instructions issued by respondent police, this Court is of the view that, nothing survives in the present writ petition for any further adjudication.
By observing the same, the writ petition is closed.
There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneou s applications pending, if any, shall stand
closed.
To,
//TRUE COPY//
Sd/- V. SAVITHRI GOWRI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER
Guntur District.
Prakasam District.
Madhu
high court
DATED:1 3/03/2024
ORDER WP.No.35690 of 2015
THE WP WITHOUT COSTS CLOSING
2 issues framed by the court
Whether police action in a matrimonial dispute amounted to harassment violating Articles 14 and 21.
Whether the writ petition alleging arbitrary police interference survives for adjudication.
P. Lakshmi
P. Vasu
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Home Department
Deputy Superintendent of Police, Ongole
Sub-Inspector of Police, Naguluppalapadu
K Manmadha Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
