Dismissed

Peyyala Anthony Kamalamma v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC5 Mar 2024WP/8966/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to complete investigation in FIR No.249 of 2016 and file a final report. The court found that the case ended in acquittal in C.C. No.118 of 2019, and consequently declared that there was no need for further adjudication of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Disposing the writ petition without any order regarding costs.

Peyyala Anthony Kamalamma Vs The State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI . (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

WEDNESDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 8966 OF 2017

¶6

Between:

¶7

Peyyala Anthony Kamalamma, W/o.Jagadish, aged about^60years, R/o.15-94, House of B.Narasimha Rao, Bodapadu, Hamlet^ofNunna, Vijayawada Rural, Krishna District.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

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

¶11

Amaravathi, Guntur District.

¶12

Station House Officer, Nunna Rural Police Station, Nunna, Vijayawada Rural, Krishna District.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

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 the Writ order or Direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of^the respondents in in FIR No.24^of 2016 completing the investigation and filing final report dated 22-07-2016 on the file of the 2nd respondent^herein as arbitrary, illegal, capricious and violative of mandatory provisions of Cr.P.O and

¶15

consequently direct the respondents to complete the investigation and file final report FIR No.249 of 2016 dated 22-07-2016 forthwith.

¶16

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 11119 OF 2017)

¶17

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 respondents to complete the investigation in FIR No.249 of 2016 dated 22- 7-2016 forthwith pending disposal^oftheabove writ petition.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner(s): SRI. SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME (AP)

¶19

The Court made the following:

¶20

¶21

APIIC0l0028n420l7

¶22

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH ;; AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶23

WEDNESDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶24

PRESENT

¶25

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO

¶26

WRIT PETITION NO: 8966 OF 2017

¶27

Between:

¶28

Peyyala Anthony Kamalamma

¶29

...PETITIONER(S)

¶30

AND

¶31

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENT(S)

¶32

Counsel for the Petitioner{s):SRI. SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY

¶33

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME (AP)

¶34

The Court made the following:

¶35

The present Writ Petition is filed under the Article^{226oftheConstitution} of India for the following relief:

¶36

"...to issue the Writ order or Direction more particularlyⁱⁿ the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction^of the respondents in completing the investigation and^filing final report in FIR No.249 of 2016 dated 22-07- 2016^onthe file of the 2nd respondent herein as arbitrary, illegal, capricious and violative of mandatory provisions of^Cr.P.C and consequently direct the respondents to complete^the investigation and file final report FIR No.249 of 2016^dated 22-07-2016 forthwith and pass such other orders..."

¶37

Heard Sri K.V.M.Chiranjeevi, learned counsel, representing^{learnedcounsel} for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government^{PleaderforHomeforofficial} respondents.

¶38

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submitted^acopyof written instructions, received from Sub Inspector of^{Police,NunnaPoliceStation,}

¶39

Vijayawada, stating that the case in Cr.No.249 of 2016^{wasendedinacquittal} vide order dated 22.01.2024, passed in C.C.No.118 of^{2019,bythelearned} III

¶40

Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada,

¶41

In view of the submissions made by learned Assistant Government^Pleader the written instructions filed by appearing for respondents and upon perusing respondent Police, this Court is of the opinion that,^{nothingsurvivesinthe} present Writ Petition for further adjudication.

¶42

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is closed. There shall^{benoorderasto} costs.

¶43

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any,^{shallstandclosed.}

¶44

SD/- M. PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

¶45

¶46

One CC to SRI. SAI GANGADHAR CHAMARTY Advocate [OPUC 2. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME (AP) .High Court Of Andhra Pradesh. [OUT]

¶47

Three CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED:06/03/2024

ORDER

WP.No.8966 of 2017

CLOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS

Peyyala Anthony Kamalamma v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Peyyala Anthony Kamalamma 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Veerapalli Eswaraiah, Vs The state of Andhra Pradesh

Kudipudi Satyanarayana, Wg District Vs Prl. Secretary, Home Dept., Hyd and 4 Others

Nagulapalem Gram Panchayath, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

P.Sumar Ali Khan S/o Late P.Mahammad Ali Khan Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M.A. Aziz Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Principal Secretary

B. Janaka Sankar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal