Disposed

Puchalapalli Mohan Reddy S/o. Late. Venuku Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC13 Feb 2024WP/4604/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought mandamus directing police to act on FIR No. 500 of 2014. Government reported the case was registered but closed as civil in nature after Sub-Divisional Police Officer orders. Finding nothing survived for adjudication, the court closed the writ petition, leaving the petitioner liberty to file a protest petition before the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition closed; liberty to file protest petition; no costs.

Puchalapalli Mohan Reddy S/o. Late. Venuku Reddy Vs… — Quashing and FIR | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY

¶4

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

•: ii El
w 7

¶7

THE HON’BLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 4604 OF 2015

¶9

Between:

¶10

Puchalapalli Mohan Reddy S/o. Late. Venuku Reddy, Occ: Agriculture R/o. Kothuru Ramamandiram Road, Kovur Village & Mandal SPSR Nellore Dist, Andhra Pradesh

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

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

¶14

The Station Housing Officer, Nellore 4th Town Police Station Nellore, Andhra Pradesh

¶15

Ponnaluru Purander Reddy S/o. Bujji Reddy, R/o. 29-3-28, Sneha Nagar, Backside of Kurugonda Narayanamma School Kondayapalem, Nellore City

¶16

Daggumati Sridhar Rao S/o. Mohan Rao, R/o. 27/2/766,^A.C. Nagar Nellore City

¶17

Pyda Sneha Lakshmi W/o. Sandeep, R/o. 5/1/373, 0pp.^to Andhra Bank Stonehousepet, Nellore City.

¶18

Vakati Narayana Reddy S/o. Sidda Reddy, R/o. Kondagunta Village Gudur Mandal. SPSR Nellore Dist.

¶19

Alluru Sudhakar Reddy S/o. Chandrasekhar Reddy, R/o. Hat No. E4, 4th Floor, 2nd Main Alpine Meadows Apartments Kuvempu Road, Vignan Nagar New Thippa Sandra Bangalore North,

¶20

Karnataka State.

¶21

■■fi
-O'-.. %■:
;
.■if.
a'
Jr V?
>■
<rr

¶22

%■:

¶23

Alluru Devasena W/o. Sudhakar Reddy, R/o. Flat No. E4, 4th Floor, 2nd Main Alpine Meadows Apartments Kuvempu Road, Vignan Nagar New Thippa Sandra Bangalore North, Karnataka State.

¶24

Sannapureddy Sudhakar Reddy S/o. Ramana Reddy,,^R/o.6-3- 668-10/65, Durganagar Colony Punjagutta, Hyderabad.

¶25

10.Sannapureddy Sukruth Reddy S/o. Sudhakar Reddy,,^R/o.6-3- 668-10/65, Durganagar Colony Punjagutta, Hyderabad.

¶26

...RESPONDENTS

¶27

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 a writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of 2nd respondent in not taking any action pursuant to the complaint FIR No. 500 of 2014 filed by the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and against Art. 14 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to take immediate action in FIR No. 500 of 2014 uninfluenced by the accused/ respondents 3 to^10.

¶28

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP. NO: 6105 OF 20151

¶29

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in^u|)port of the writ petition j the High Court may be pleased to direct^respondent^{totakeimmediate} action in FIR No. 500 of 2014 uninfluenced by the accused/ respondents 3 to 10. Counsel forth© PetItionenSRI. M/S INDUS LAW FIRM Counsel for the Respondents No.1,2: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondents No.3 to 10: 41?^

¶30

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶31

APHCOI00017I20I5

¶32

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADE3H " AMARAVATI (Special Qriginal Jurisdiction)

¶33

[3310]

¶34

WEDNESDAY ,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶35

PRESENT

¶36

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶37

WRIT PETITION NO: 4604 OF 2015

¶38

Between:

¶39

Puchalapalli Mohan Reddy S/o. Late. Venuku Reddy, Occ: Agriculture R/o. Kdthuru Ramamandiram Road, Kovur Village & Mandal SPSR^NelloreDist, Andhra Pradesh

¶40

...PETITIONER(S)

¶41

AND

¶42

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

¶43

The Station Housing Officer, Nellore 4th Town Police^{StationNellore,Andhra} Prgdesh

¶44

Ponnaluru Purander Reddy S/o Bujji Reddy, R/o. 29-3-28,^SnehaNagar, Backside of Kurugonda Narayanamma School Kondayapalem,^NelloreCity

¶45

Daggumati Sridhar Rao S/o Mohan Rao, R/o. 27/2/766,^{A.C.NagarNellore} City

¶46

Pyda Sneha Lakshmi W/o Sandeep, R/o. 5/1/873, 0pp.^tpAndhraBank Stonehousepet, Nellore City.

¶47

Vakati Narayana Reddy S/o Sidda Reddy, R/o. Kondagunta^VillageGudur Mandal, SPSR Nellore Dist.

¶48

Alluru Sudhakar Reddy S/o Chandrasekhar Reddy, R/o.^HatNo.E4,4th Floor, 2nd Main Alpine Meadows Apartments Kuvempu Road, Vignan Nagar New Thippa Sandra Bangalore North, Karnataka State.

¶49

Alluru Devasena W/o Sudhakar Reddy, R/o. Flat No.^{E4,4thFloor,2ndMain} Alpine Meadows Apartments Kuvempu Road, Vignan Nagar^NewThippa Sandra Bangalore North, Karnataka State.

¶50

Sannapureddy Sudhakar Reddy S/o Ramana Reddy, R/o.^{6-3-668-10/65,} Durganagar Colony Punjagutta, Hyderabad.

¶51

lO.Spnnapureddy Sukruth Reddy S/o Sudhakar Reddy, R/o.^{6-3-668-10/65,} Durganagar Colony Punjagutta, Hyderabad.

¶52

...RESPONDENTS

¶53

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 toto issue a writ, order or direction more particularly^one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of 2nd respondent in not taking any action pursuant to the complaint FIR No. 500 of 2014 filed by the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary and against Art. 14 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to take immediate action in FIR No. 500 of 2014 uninfluenced by the accused/ respondents 3 to 10

¶54

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2015(WPMP. NO: 6105 OF 2015)

¶55

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the^{circumstancesstatedin} the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct respondent to take immediate action in FIR No. 500 of 2014 uninfluenced by the accused/ respondents 3 to 10

¶56

Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI. M/S INDUS LAW FIRM

¶57

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME (AP)

¶58

The Court made the following Order:

¶59

This writ petition is filed declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 in not taking any action pursuant to the complaint^FIRNo.500Of 2014 filed by the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary.

¶60

Heard Mr.Gunasekhar, learned counsel representing M/s.Indus Law Firm, appearing for the petitioner dnd learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the official respondents.

¶61

On hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader for^Home furnished a copy of Written Instructions issued by Sub Inspector of Police, Dargamitta P.S. (IVthTown P.S.,) Nellore City, dated 14.02.2024, stating that on receipt of Court Endorsement Petition^{fromVAdditional} Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore, a case was registered in Dargamitta P.S. in Cr.No.500/2014 under Sections 120 (b), 467, 468,

¶62

■5^

¶63

471, 199, 200 read with 156 (3) Cr.P.C. on 15.11.2014^andtakenup investigation. During the course of investigation,^{thepolicecameto} know that the case is purely civil in nature. As such,^{th^yhadsent} the Sub Divisional Police Officer, Nellore Town to^treatthis proposal to case as “Civil Nature' and obtained orders to that effect vide proceedings C.No.27/GL-SDPON(T)/2016, dated 22.06.2016-

¶64

In view of the submissions made by learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home and upon perusing the written instructions^issuedby respondent police, this Court is of the view that,^{nothingsurvivesinthe} present writ petition for any further adjudication.

¶65

in Nature 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. If the “Civil notice was not served to the petitioner, the petitioner^{isatlibertytofile} protest petition before the concerned Court. Thereafter, the trial Court is directed to proceed further, in accordance with^law.

¶66

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶67

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if^any, shall

¶68

stand closed.

¶69

Sd/- K. TATA RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

/s^TION OFFICER

To,

One CC to SRI. M/S INDUS LAW FIRM Advocate [OPUC]

¶74

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

¶75

Three C.D.Copies

¶76

¶77

HIGH COURT DATED;14/02/2024

¶78

ORDER

¶79

WP.No.4604 of 2015

¶80

CLOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

Puchalapalli Mohan Reddy S/o. Late. Venuku Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Puchalapalli Mohan Reddy S/o. Late. Venuku Reddy 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

Narra Venkateswaramma Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal

Byreddy Chinna Venkateswar Rao, s/o. late Byreddy Appala Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. G. Chowdeswari, Anantapur Dist. Vs the State of a.P.,Home,Hyd.,and 4 Otrs.

Amruthapudi Ashalatha Vs Sri Praveen Prakash,Ias

Mr. v. Jayakumar Reddy Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

V.Venkata Lakshmi, W/o.v.Shivappa, Vs The Govt. of A.P. Rep. by its Prl.