In a writ petition challenging police inaction on a complaint, the court held that no adjudication was necessary as a criminal case had already been registered and investigation was underway, leading to the disposal of the petition.
Disposed giving liberty to the petitioner to take appropriate steps pursuant to the investigation.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.16240 of 2010
DATED: 21.03.2014
Between:
Shaik Khirunnisa Begum And The Superintendent of Police, Nellore, Nellore district & others
... Petitioner
… Respondents
The Court made the following:
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAMALINGESWARA RAO WRIT PETITION No.16240 of 2010
ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 3 and the learned counsel for respondents 4 to 6 and 8.
2. This writ petition was filed challenging the action of respondents 1 to 3 in not taking any action on the complaint dated 14.05.2010 made by the petitioner against respondents 4 to 8.
3. A Counter-affidavit was filed by the 3rd respondent on 19.10.2010 itself stating that the petitioner submitted a complaint through speed post on 17.05.2010 to the Sub-Inspector of Police, A.S. Peta Police station, Nellore district with regard to the alleged action of respondents 4 to 8, who fixed a board in her land and threatened her with dire consequences and requesting for taking necessary action. Pursuant to the said complaint, the 3rd respondent made an entry in the G.D. and verified the facts with the villagers and neighbours of the place and it was revealed that the 4th respondent is the cousin brother and other respondents 5 to 8 are relatives. It further discloses that there was no board and no such incident occurred as alleged in the complaint and hence, no case was registered. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the Inspector of Police, Atmakur on 07.10.2010 stating that the 8th respondent and others trespassed into her land and damaged the basement constructed around the said land. Pursuant to the said complaint, a case in Cr.No.61 of 2010 was registered for the offences under Sections 447, 427, 379 r/w 34 IPC on 08.10.2010 against the 8th and 4th respondents on the file of A.S.Peta Police Station, Nellore district and took up investigation and the same is under investigation.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly stated that in view of the averments made in the affidavit, nothing survives for adjudication and he would take necessary steps depending upon the investigation.
5. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to take appropriate steps pursuant to the investigation made by the 3rd respondent on the complaint dated 07.10.2010, which was registered as Cr.No.61 of 2010 on the file of A.S. Peta Police Station, Nellore district. Pending miscellaneous petitions in this writ petition, if any, shall stand dismissed in consequence. No order as to costs.
A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J
Date: 21.03.2014 BSS
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO 1
WRIT PETITION No.16240 of 2010
Date: 21.03.2014
BSS
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the police's inaction survives for adjudication.
Shaik Khirunnisa Begum
Superintendent of Police, Nellore
A. Ramalingeswara Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
