In a contempt case, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh held that no further inquiry was necessary after the petitioner's representation was considered under a previous order. The court disposed of the matter with liberty to challenge the order later.
No further enquiry; liberty to challenge the order; no costs.
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 JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI
CONTEMPT CASE No. 181 OF 2009
Between:
Bandi Satyanarayanamma
..... PETITIONER
AND
Sri Y.Nagi Reddy, Superintendent of Police, East Godavari District at Kakinada and others
.....RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the Petitioner:
Counsel for the Respondents:
The Court made the following :
THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI
CONTEMPT CASE No. 181 of 2009
O R D E R :
It is represented by the learned Government Pleader for Home that in compliance with the order of this Court in W.P.No.22434 of 2008, the petitioner’s representation was already considered and order passed thereupon was served on the petitioner on 20.03.2009.
Hence, no further enquiry is necessary and the Contempt Case is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order by working out the appropriate remedy as available under law, if so advised. No costs.
_____________ Date: 17.03.2010 G. ROHINI, J.
Ivd
Bandi Satyanarayanamma
Sri Y. Nagi Reddy
G. Rohini
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
