Dismissed

Dr. G.Laxminarayana, v. The State of A.P.

Telangana HC10 Feb 2011CRLP/4239/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. regarding offences under IPC and the SC/ST Act, the court dismissed the petition but extended protection against arrest for the accused doctors, noting the investigation into the property dispute remained incomplete under a prior order.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Investigation Officer not to arrest petitioners until completion of investigation and filing of charge sheet.

Dr. G.Laxminarayana, Vs The State of A.P. — Caste Atrocities | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU

¶2

CRIMINAL PETITION No.4239 of 2009

¶3

DATED: 10.02.2011

¶4

BETWEEEN:

¶5

1. Dr. G.Laxminarayana, S/o. Rajaveeru & another.

¶6

… Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 &2

¶7

AND

¶8

1. State of A.P. rep. by Public Prosecutor &another

¶9

… Respondents/Complainant

¶10

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU

¶11

CRIMINAL PETITION No.4239 of 2009

¶12

ORDER:

¶13

The petitioners 1 and 2, who are father and son, are Doctors. They are accused of offences punishable under Sections 448, 506, 427, 323/34 IPC and Section 3(i)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short, the Act) in Crime No.149 of 2009 of Jammikunta Police Station of Karimnagar District. The 2^nd respondent/defacto complainant is their neighbour. It is alleged that the petitioners along with others trespassed into the 2^nd

¶14

respondent’s property and demolished a potion of the house under construction and when the 2^nd respondent questioned about their high handed acts, they beat her and abused her in the name of her Madiga caste. It is contented by the senior counsel appearing for the petitioners that, previously, the 1^st respondent’s mother-in-law by name T.Aruna gave report to the Gram Panchayat authorities complaining against the 2^nd respondent’s husbands illegal construction of their house property without permission and by encroaching into the petitioners site and that when the petitioners obstructed construction of property encroaching into their site, a false case was registered against the petitioners with a view to coerce them for some settlement. Truth or falsity of the allegations in the report given by the 2^nd respondent to the Police is a question of fact, which this Court cannot go into in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It is for the Investigating Officer to go into those allegations and decide the same.

¶15

2. Previously, by order dated 09.12.2010, this Court ordered for completion of investigation within two months and directed the Investigating Officer not to arrest the petitioners till then. It is stated that no final report/charge sheet is filed by the Police till now. Having regard to the dispute between the neighbours, I propose to continue the said order till completion of

¶16

the investigation.

¶17

3. In the result, the petition is dismissed. However, the Investigation Officer is directed not to arrest the petitioners 1 and 2 till completion of the investigation and filing of charge sheet/ final report.

¶18

_____________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J

¶19

Dated: 10.02.2011 ysk

¶20

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU

¶21

CRIMINAL PETITION No.4239 of 2009

¶22

DATED: 10.02.2011

¶23

ysk

Dr. G.Laxminarayana, v. The State of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. G.Laxminarayana, v. The State of A.P.

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

V.Digamber Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Rangu Gangamma Vs Rangu Jaya

Penta Sasibhushan Rao Vs The State of A.P

K. Malleswaramma Vs The State of A.P. rep. by Public Prosecutor

Sri J.J.David, A-2 Vs The Sho., Mahabubnagar II Town P.S.

Gade Suguna Reddy Vs the State of A.P. and Ano.