A writ petition alleging illegal detention and violation of human rights by the police was dismissed. The Court found the case to be an abuse of process as the Human Rights Commission had already disposed of the identical complaint, and the underlying criminal case ended in acquittal.
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.
APHC010036052012
[3310]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY ,THE NINETEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO T HOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE K MANMADHA RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 9867 OF 2012
Between:
T.V.S.Ramesh, ...PETITIONER
AND
The Government Of And h ra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1.PONNADA SREE V YAS
Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.GP FOR HOME (A P )
2.6963/G L NAGES W AR RAO
The Court made the following:
ORDER:-
This Writ Petition i s filed under Article 226 of the Con s titution of India, seeking the following reli e f:
“…..to issue a Writ, Order o r direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in detaining the petitioner in illegal custody is arbitrary, illegal and violative of H u man Rights apart from violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 22 of Constitution of India and c onsequently direct the DGP of AP to order enquiry b y CBCID and pay appropriate compensation to the petitioner and pass such other orders....”
of the 5th respondent, nothing prevented the 4th respondent from not charging the petitioner under law. No notice under Section 50 of Cr.P.C was served to the relation of the petitioner with regard to his arrest and gross violation of Section 57 of Cr.P.C in not producing the petitioner before the Magistrate within 24 hours of detaining the petitioner in custody of police. Therefore, the present writ petition came to be filed questioning the inaction of the respondents/ police for illegal detention of the petitioner.
the facts properly and hence a Charge Memo was issued by the Sub Divisional Police Officer, Kakinada and later after perusing the explanation submitted by him, he was awarded a ‘Censure’, which fact is clearly stated in the enquiry report that as per the Station General Dairy, Sentry Relief Book and other connected records available in Pithapuram Police Station, the petitioner was arrested in Crime No.168 of 2007 by the S.I of Police, Pithapuram on 30.07.2007 at 2 p.m at Madhura Nagar, Kakinada and produced him before the Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Pithapuram for judicial custody after complying all legal formalities. Late he was enlarged on bail. The Human Rights Commission also held that the petitioner has failed to establish any violation of human rights by the respondents 3 and 4 and also the complaint is barred by limitation. Therefore, the writ petition is devoid of any merit and requested to dismiss the same.
petitioners have failed to establish any violation of human rights by the respondents/ police and the complaint is barred by limitation. Therefore the case was closed and disposed of.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed.
_____________________________ DR.JUSTICE K. MANMADHA RAO
KK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition alleging illegal detention by the police is maintainable in view of the prior disposal of a similar complaint by the Human Rights Commission and the acquittal of the petition
T.V.S. Ramesh
The Government of Andhra Pradesh
Others
K Manmadha Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
