B Jagan Mohan Rao Vs the State of Ap

B. Jagan Mohan Rao, S/o. Subbarao, aged 42 years, Occ: Sub Inspector of Police ( Under Orders of dismissal from Service), R/o Flat No.509, C-Block, Capital Edge Apartment, Opp- Alpha Hotel, Mangalagiri, Guntur District

¶12

...Petitioner

¶13

AND

¶14

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.by its Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, Secretariat building Velagapudi Amaravathi.

¶15

The Director General of Police, Government of Andhra Pradesh, Mangalagiri, Guntur District.

¶16

The Inspector General of Police, South Coastal Zone, Guntur Region Guntur District.

¶17

...Respondents

¶18

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 particularlyⁱⁿ the nature of Writ of Mandamus in not considering the case of the petitioner for reinstatement into duty, in view of suspension of conviction passed by the Hon’ble High Court dt.17-10-2024 in I.A.No.2/2024 in CrI.A.No. 169/2024, by declaring the proceedings C.No.OI/PR/2016 ROO No.246/2024 dt. 15-04-2024

¶19

it

¶20

issued by the 3'^^ respondent in dismissing the petitioner from service by invoking Article 311 (2) of constitution of India, R/W 25 (i) of ARCS (CC and A) Rules due to his conviction in SC.No.20/2017 dt.26-02-2024 is arbitrary, illegal and in violation of Article 14,16, and 21 of the Constitution of India, and to issue a consequential direction to the 3^^^ respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for reinstatement into service in view of the suspension of conviction by this Hon’ble court dt. 17-10-2024 in I.A.No.2/2024 in Crl.A.No. 169/2024.

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶22

Petition under Section 151 CPC 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 respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for reinstatement into service pending Crl.A.No. 169/2024 on the file of this Hon’ble Court in view of suspension of conviction dt. 17-10-2024 by Hon’ble court in i.A.No.2/2024 forthwith.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI A. RAJENDRA BABU

¶24

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR SERVICES I

¶25

The Court made the following order:

¶26

r

¶27

APHC010456212025

¶28

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA

¶29

PRADESH

¶30

[3460] AT AMARAVATI

¶31

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶32

THURSDAY,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF. SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶33

PRESENT

¶34

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

¶35

WRIT PETITION NO: 24148/2025

¶36

Between:

¶37

1.B JAGAN MOHAN RAO, S/0 SUBBARAO, AGED 42 YEARS, OCC- SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE ( UNDER ORDERS OF DISMISSAL FROM SERVICE), R/0 FLAT NO.509, C-BLOCK, CAPITAL EDGE APARTMENT, OPPALPHA HOTEL, MAMQA.! AQIR! 0| IKJ-T! ID niPTRiriT

¶38

...PETITIONER

¶39

AND

¶40

1.THE STATE OF AP, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDING, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI.

¶41

2.THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶42

3.THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, SOUTH COASTAL ZONE, GUNTUR REGION, GUNTUR DISTRICT.

¶43

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶44

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 in the nature of Writ of Mandamus in not

¶45

2

¶46

%

¶47

considering the reinstatement into duty, in view of suspension of conviction passed by the Honble High Court dt. 17-10-2024 in I.A.No.2/2024 in CrI.A.No.169/2024, by case of the petitioner for declaring the proceedings C.No.OI/PR/2016 ROO No.246/2024 dt. 15-04-2024 issued by the 3rd respondent in dismissing^the petitioner from service by invoking Article 311 (2)^{ofconstitution} of India, R/W 25 (i) of ARCS (CC and A) Rules due to his conviction in SC.No.20/2017 dt.26-02-2024 is arbitrary, illegal and in violation of Article 14,16, and 21 of the Constitution of India, and to issue a consequential direction to the 3rd respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for reinstatement into service in view of the suspension^of conviction by this Honble court dt. 17-10-2024 in I.A.No.2/2024 in CrI.A.No. 169/2024 and to pass

¶48

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶49

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 Pleased to direct the 3rd respondent to consider the case of Hon’ble the petitioner^for reinstatement into service pending CrI.A.No. 169/2024^onthefile of this Hcnble Court in view of suspension of conviction^dt. 1710-2024 by Honble court in I.A.No.2/2024 forthwith and to pass

¶50

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶51

1.ARAJENDRA BABU

¶52

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶53

1.GP FOR SERVICES I

¶54

The Court made the following:

¶55

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NYAPATHY VIJAY

/

W.P.No.24148 of 2025

O R DE R:

In this writ petition, Petitioner is questioning non consideration of his case for reinstatement in view of suspension of conviction of this Court in IANo.2 of 2024 in Crl.A.No.169 of 2024 dated 17.10.2024.

¶60

The Petitioner was working as Sub-Inspector of Police. While so, a criminal case was registered in Cr.No.4^of2016 in J.Panguluru Police Station under Sections 324, 384,⁵⁰⁶ read with 34 IPC 3(1) (x) of SC & ST (POA) Act at the instance^ofone Gollamudi Tirupallu. The same was numbered as Spl.S.C.No.20 of 2017 before the Family Judge cum FAC Special Judge^forTrial of Offences under SC & ST (POA) Act cum VII Additional^District and Sessions Judge, Ongole.

¶61

At the same time, a departmental enquiry was initiated against the Petitioner on 14.03.2016 under Rule 20 of APCS (CC & A) Rules. Questioning the same, the Petitioner filed O.A.No.492 of 2018 before the A.P.Administrative Tribunal and the same was disposed of by order dated 15.03.2018 directing

¶62

2

¶63

the Respondents to stop the departmental proceedings pending trial in Spl.S.C.No.20 of 2017.

¶64

After due trial in Spl.S.C.No.20 of 2017, the trial Court by its order dated 26.02.2024 convicted the Petitioner for the offences alleged and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years apart from fine of Rs. 10,000/- among other punishments. Consequent to the conviction, Respondent^No.3 vide proceedings C.No.l/PR/2016, R.O.O.No.246/2024 dated 15.04.2024 dismissed the Petitioner from service in view of the conviction in the criminal case.

¶65

Questioning the conviction order in Spl.S.C.No.20 of 2017, the Petitioner along with co-accused filed Crl.A.No.169 of 2024 before this Court and this Court by order dated 01.03.2024 in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in the Appeal suspended the sentence and later by order dated 17.10.2024 in I.A.No.2 of 2024 suspended^the conviction. The operative portion of the order reads as under:

¶66

‘Accordingly, this Interlocutory Application Is allowed, suspending the conviction passed against the Petitioners/A1 andA2 vide judgment in S.C.No.20/2017, dated 26.02.2024, on the file of the Family Court-cum-VIII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ongole, FAC Special Judge for trail of

¶67

ts^-

¶68

3

¶69

Offences under SC/STs (POA) 1989-cum-VII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ongole. ’

¶70

In view of the suspension of conviction, the Petitioner had given a representation to Respondent No.3 to set aside the order of dismissal dated 15.04.2024 and to reinstate him into service. As the same is not being considered, the present writ petition is filed.

¶71

It is to be noted that this Court in W.P.No.29886 of 2023 in a similar fact scenario, after considering the relevant case law, passed a detailed order setting aside the order of^dismissaland the Petitioner therein was directed to be reinstated into service pending disposal of Criminal Appeal. Paragraphs 16 and 17 thereof is extracted below:

¶72

‘16. Given, the discussion supra, since the conviction^inthe judgment dated 10.05.2023 in S.C.No.346 of 2013 on the file of the IV Additional District & Sessions Judge -cumSpecial Judge for trial of offences against Women, Anantapuramu against the petitioner has been stayed till disposal of the main appeal, the proceedings impugned^are liable to be set aside. 17. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. The proceedings^-in R.C.No.1542/A4/2023, dated 10.08.2023, issued by respondent No.3 are hereby set aside.

¶73

4

¶74

Respondent No.3 Shall reinstate the petitioner, forthwith. No costs. ’

¶75

A similar view was taken by this Court in W.P.No.25196 of 2024 also.

¶76

In the present case, the Petitioner would have to be considered for reinstatement in view of the conviction being suspended by this Court as mentioned supra.

¶77

In that view, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions;

¶78

/^\ -ru_ n 1 \aj : nc n.c:bpuiiu IS snaii Gonside.' the representation of the Petitioner for reinstatement into service for revoking the order of dismissal of the Petitioner vide proceedings C.No.I/PR/2016, R.O.O.No.246/2024 dated 15.04.2024 taking note of the fact that the conviction was suspended by this Court and orders of this Court in W.P.No.29886 of 2023 and W.P.No.25196 of 2024, within a period of six weeks from today,

¶79

(b) No order as to costs.

¶80

5

¶81

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions if any shall^stand

/

dismissed.

//TRUE COPY//

NAGAM/VIA assistant REfilSfnAR SECt/O^FF/CER

¶86

To

¶87

The Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat building, Velagapudi, Amaravathi.

¶88

The Director General of Police, Government of Andhra Pradesh Mangalagiri, Guntur District.

¶89

The Inspector General of Police, South Coastal Zone, Guntur Region,

¶90

% Guntur District.

¶91

•4. One CC to Sri A Raje s su: a B^U.iauUj rMJVU'ocaLe r/-\rM[*^rUUji/-\t 5. Two CCs to GP for Services I, High Court of Andhra Pradesh [OUT] 6. Two CD Copies

Cnr

HIGH COURT

DATED:11/09/2025

ORDER WP NO. 24148 OF 2025

¶96

18 SEP 2025 %

¶97

DISPOSING OF THE W.P. WITHOUT COSTS

B Jagan Mohan Rao v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B Jagan Mohan Rao v. the State of Ap

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sannamelam Pedda Tirumala Narayana Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

K v S S N Rajasekhar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

M Rajasekhar Vs the State of Ap

K. Nagaraju Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

D. Audinarayana, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

S Krishna Swamy Vs the State of Ap