Smt.G.Sulochanamma v. The Station House Officer
Case brief
What is this about?
Single judge dismissed a writ petition questioning police inaction on investigation under the SC/ST (POA) Act and CrPC. The court observed that investigation was reported complete and directed the court to file an application for police protection instead.
What did the court decide?
Directed petitioner to file an application for police protection; writ petition closed.
What the court decided
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU
W.P.NO.19963 OF 2008
ORDER
This writ petition is filed seeking a Mandamus declaring the inaction on the part of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in not entrusting the investigation as per rule 7 (2) of SC and ST (POA) Act, 1989 and also not conducting investigation effectively as per Section 157 of Cr.P.C as arbitrary and illegal.
There is no necessity of going into all the details.
At paragraph No.3 of the counter-affidavit, it is stated as
under:
“I respectfully submit that during the course of investigation, the then Investigation Officer, examined as many as 10 witnesses and their detailed statements were recorded under Section 161 CrPC. Consequent on his transfer, I have taken up the investigation as per the Proceedings of the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad on 11-7-2008. Prima facie case is made out against the accused and immediately I arrested the accused on 12-10-2008 at 16.30 hrs and after production of the accused before the Court, she was remanded to judicial custody. Investigation was completed. After completion of the investigation, I filed the charge sheet before the Hon’ble Court of II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad on 22-10-2008 and the same is yet to be taken on file by the said Hon’ble Court.”
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondent authorities were directed to declare their inaction in investigation illegal.
Whether relief was granted regarding police protection for the apprehending petitioner.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioner
- respondent
Respondent Nos. 2 and 3
Coram
C.V. Ramulu
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- WP/19963/2008
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court