Disposed

H.D.F.C.Bank Limited, Registered office at H.D.F.C.Bank v. The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad

Telangana HC4 Sept 2012WP/11670/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This common order disposed of four writ petitions (W.P.Nos. 28487, 31461 of 2010 and 8643, 11670 of 2011). The Court directed the concerned Police StationOfficers to complete investigation into specified crimes within three months without being influenced by a prior court order. All interim orders were vacated.

What did the court decide?

Direction to complete investigation without influence of prior order within three months; interim orders vacated.

H.D.F.C.Bank Limited, Registered office at… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN

¶2

WRIT PETITION Nos.28487 & 31461 of 2010 and 8643 & 11670 of 2011

¶3

COMMON ORDER:

¶4

Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 23.04.2012, affidavit have been filed on behalf of the registered owner (respondent No.3) HDFC Bank and the Station House Officers of Chintakomma Dinn Police Station, Y.S.R.District and Ramgopalpet Police Station Secunderabad. The said affidavits are made part of the record.

¶5

Both Sri Ch.Ravindra Babu, Learned Counsel appearing for th auction purchaser (petitioner in W.P.Nos.28487 and 31461 of 2010 and Sri K.Suresh Reddy, Learned Counsel for HDFC Bank (petitione in W.P.Nos.8643 and 11670 of 2011), would submit that, instead o going into the merits of the aforesaid Writ Petitions, it would suffice this Court were to vacate the interim orders and, as suggested b the Learned Government Pleader for Home, pass an order directin that the investigation into Crime No.134 of 2010 on the file o Chintakomma Dinne Police Station, Y.S.R.District, and Crim No.255 of 2010 on the file of Ramgopalpet Police Station Secunderabad, be completed at the earliest.

¶6

Sri J.Ugra Narasimha, Learned Counsel appearing for th registered owner of the vehicle, would draw attention of this Court t the order passed by the I Additional Sessions Judge, Kadapa i Crl.MP.No.1023 of 2011 dated 30.08.2011 (in Crime No.134 of 2010 to contend that the observations made in the said order woul influence investigation into the aforesaid crimes.

¶7

Both Sri Ch.Ravindra Babu and Sri K.Suresh Reddy, Learne Counsel for the auction purchaser and HDFC Bank respectively would, however, contend that any observations made in an orde

¶8

granting bail or anticipatory bail would not bind the police official from investigating into the complaints. Interest of justice would require this Court making it clear tha investigation into Crime Nos.134 and 255 of 2010 be completed a the earliest without being influenced in any manner by th observations made in Crl.M.P.No.1023 of 2011 dated 30.08.2011 Learned Government Pleader for Home would submit tha investigation would be completed at the earliest and, in any event within a period of three months from today.

¶9

I consider it appropriate, therefore, to direct the Station Hous Officers of Chintakomma Dinne Police Station, Y.S.R.District, an Ramgopalpet Police Station, Secunderabad, to investigate into Crim Nos.134 and 255 of 2010 respectively without being influenced b the observations made in Crl.M.P.No.1023 of 2011 dated 30.08.2011 and complete investigation within a period of three months from today. All the interim orders passed in the aforesaid Writ Petition stand vacated.

¶10

With the aforesaid observations, the Writ Petitions ar disposed of. However, in the circumstances, without costs.

¶11

RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J

¶12

Date:04.09.2012 usd

H.D.F.C.Bank Limited, Registered office at H.D.F.C.Bank v. The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

H.D.F.C.Bank Limited, Registered office at H.D.F.C.Bank v. The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad

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

The Tadpatri Cooperative Town Bank Ltd. Vs The second Appellate Authority Under a.P.Shops and Estb Act

M/s.Mamatha Chit Fund (P) Ltd. Vs Sri.D.Srihari

Gonela alevelu Mangamma Vs Sri Ch.Ramesh Babu

K S S Pavan Kumar Vs M/s Radha Realty Corporation (India) Pvt. Ltd.

G. Sai Ram, Vs The Road Transport Authority

K Harinath Vs M/s Radha Realty Corporation (India) Pvt. Ltd.