This High Court order dismisses a writ petition filed under Article 226 regarding non-investigation of a crime and refusal of a passport as infructuous, without substantive hearing on the merits before the filing.
Petition dismissed as infructuous; any interim orders deemed vacated.
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 SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN
WRIT PETITION NO: 8406 OF 2024
Between:
Satya Prasad Lalam, S/o. Satyanarayana Lalam, Aged about 60 years, R/o.44, Lalam Koduru, Rambilli Mandal, Anakapalli, Visakhapatnam.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
f
be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents particularly 3'^^ respondent in not conducting any investigation and not filing charge sheet in respect of Crime No. 236 of 2020 on the file of Nandigam Police Station, Nandigam, Srikakulam District as illegal, arbitrary, contrary to Sec 173 of Cr.P.C and in violation of principles of natural of justice the Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3^^ respondent to conduct enquiry and submit report/ Charge Sheet to the concerned magistrate in respect of Crime No.236 of 2020 on the file of Nandigam Police Station, Nandigam, Srikakulam District.
lA NO: 1 OF 2024
Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 4*' respondent to issue pass port to the petitioner pursuant to the Passport application File No. VS1076221774324.
Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR SATA
Counsel for the Respondents No.1 to 4: SC FOR CENTRAL
GOVERNMENT
Counsel for the Respondents No.5: GP FOR HOME
The Court made the following: ORDER
/
APHC010168352024 r I 02
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
[3233]
TUESDAY ,THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN
WRIT PETITION NO: 8406/2024
Between:
Satya Prasad Lalam ...PETITIONER
AND
Union Of India and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.VIJAYA KUMAR SATA
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
2.GP FOR HOME
The Court made the following Order:
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits thatthecauseinthewrit petition does not survive.
- Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. Interim order if any deemed to have been vacated. There shall benoorderastocosts.
2
As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any,shallstandclosed.
SD/- B CHITTI JOSEPH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To,
KKK
HIGH COURT
<br>
DATED:07/05/2024
ORDER
WP.No.8406 of 2024
X D ii JAN 2025
S- .*
^ . Current SKiren
BesPATCt^ ^
DISMISSING THE W.P
AS INFRUCTUOUS.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Satya Prasad Lalam
Union Of India
Passport Authority of India
Regional Passport Officer, Vijayawada
Regional Passport Officer, Visakhapatnam
Station House Officer, Yelamanchali TN Police Station
B Krishna Mohan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
