Disposed

Eaga Venkataramanaiah, S/o Yedukondalu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC18 Mar 2024WP/42562/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners alleged police manhandling, over-12-hour detention and refusal to receive their representation. The State reported a case was registered on the representation but investigation found no prima facie case against the Sub Inspector. Citing its earlier interim order restraining police excesses, the court closed the writ petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition closed in terms of the Court's order dated 31.12.2015; no costs; pending interlocutory applications closed.

Eaga Venkataramanaiah, S/o Yedukondalu Vs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

-o

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAV)^ (Special Original Jurisdiction) \

¶3

TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH

¶4

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 42562 OF 2015

¶8

Between:

¶9

Eaga Venkataramanaiah, S/o Yedukondalu, R/o Chalivendra Muthukur Village & Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

¶10

Sreeramula Srinivasulu S/o Raghuramaiah, R/o Chalivendra Muthukur Village & Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

¶11

Perumalla Kiran Kumar S/o Ramanaiah, R/o Chalivendra @ Muthukur Village & Mandal, SPSR Nellore District.

¶12

...PETITIONER(S)

¶13

AND

¶14

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Home Department Rep. by its Principal Secretary Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶15

The Sub Divisional Police Officer, Nellore Rural, SPSR Nellore District.

¶16

The S.H.O., Muthukuru P.S., Muthukuru Village & Mandal SPSR Nellore District.

¶17

Sri J.P.Srinivasa Reddy S/o Veerareddy, Sub Inspector^ofPolice Muthukuru Police Station SPSR Nellore District.

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

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 in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action on the part of the 3rd Respondent manhandling the Petitioners indiscriminately without any reasonable cause, illegally confining in the police station for^{morethan12hourson26-} 12-2015, the action on the part of the 2nd Respondent Office not receiving the representation dt. 27-12-2015 as illegal, arbitrary^andviolative of the fundamental rights of the Petitioners consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to receive the representation dt.27-12-2015, cause necessary enquiry in the contents of the said representation, take stringent action against the 3rd Respondent. i.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP. NO: 54882 OF 2015) 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 issue an interim direction, directing the 3rd Respondent not to interfere with the lawful activities i.e. environmental awareness programmes conducted by the Petitioners and their men in the villages of Muthukuru Mandal, SPSR Nellore District pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶20

I.A. NO: 2 OF 2015(WPMP. NO: 54883 OF 2015)

¶21

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 issue an interim direction, directing the 2nd Respondent to receive the representation of the Petitioners dt.27-12-2015, conduct necessary enquiry on the high handed action on the part of the 3rd Respondent pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitloner(s): SRI. K ANANDA RAO (NONE APPEARED)

¶23

Counsel for the Respondents 1 to 3 : GP FOR HOME

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : NONE

¶25

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶26

¶27

APHC010015322015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3310] (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶28

TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶29

PRESENT

¶30

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶31

WRIT PETITION NO: 42562/2015

¶32

Between:

¶33

Eaga Venkataramanaiah, S/o Yedukondalu ...PETITIONER(S) and Others

¶34

AND

¶35

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

¶36

Counsel for the Petitioner(S):

¶37

l.K ANANDA RAO

¶38

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶39

l.GP FOR HOME (AP)

¶40

2.15516/GP FOR HOME (AP)

¶41

The Court made the following order:

¶42

The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief: "...to issue a writ, order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus declaring the action on the part of the 3rd respondent manhandling the Petitioners indiscriminately without any reasonable cause, illegally confining in the police station for more^than 12 hours on 26-12-2015, the action on the part of the 2nd respondent office not receiving the representation dt. 27-12-2015, as illegal, arbitrary and violative^of the fundamental rights of the petitioners consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to receive the

¶43

¶44

representation dt.27-12-2015, cause necessary enquiry in the contents of the said representation, take stringent action against the 3rd Respondent..."

¶45

None appeared for the petitioners.

¶46

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, reiterating the contents averred in the counter affidavit, submits that basing on the representation, dated 27.12.2015, a case in Crime No.28 of 2016, dated 08.02.2016 was registered and the investigation reveals that no substantial evidence was established prima facie case against the 3 rd respondent.

¶47

At the stage of admission of this case, while issuing notice, this Court has passed an order, dated 30.12.2015 directing the police authorities and more particularly^the 3 rd respondent not to exceed his lawful authority or interfere^with the activities of the petitioners, so long as they^arelawfuland authorized. Even otherwise, the police authorities shall abide by the due procedure, in the event any action is warranted against the petitioners.

¶48

In view of the above said circumstances, this Court deems it appropriate to close this writ petition, in terms^of the order, dated 31.12.2015 passed by this Court.

¶49

¶50

¶51

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed. There shall be

¶52

no order as to costs.

¶53

As a sequel, interlocutory applications, if any pending,

¶54

shall stands closed.

¶55

//TRUE COPY//

¶56

Sd/- U.SRI DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶57

SECTtON OFFICER

¶58

¶59

One CC to SRI K ANANDA RAO Advocate [OPUC]

¶60

Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶61

Three CD Copies

Madhu

HIGH COURT

DATED:19/03/2024

ORDER

WP.No.42562 of 2015

CLOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

Eaga Venkataramanaiah, S/o Yedukondalu v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Eaga Venkataramanaiah, S/o Yedukondalu 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

Malle Naga Subbamma Vs the Assistant Commissioner

D. Dandu Srinivasa Kumara Varma, W.G. Dist. Vs Prl. Secy., Home Dept., Hyd and 6 Othrs

S.Venkateswarlu S/o Bala Krishnaiah Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Chintala Bangaramma, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s My Interiors Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

D. Badrinath S/o D. Suresh Babu, Vs Government of Andhra Pradesh