Disposed

Bussa Rajendra v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC2 Jul 2018WP/19077/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging respondents for not acting on specific complaints and arresting accused. The Court found that cases were registered based on the petitioner's complaint and investigation entrusted to another officer, redressing the grievance. Regarding land report, a letter was sent to the Tahsildar.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of; cases registered on petitioner's complaint; policeto procure land report from Tahsildar.

Bussa Rajendra Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITON No.19077 of 2018

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This writ petition is filed to declare the action of respondents 1 to 12 in not taking any action against the complaint dated 10-02-2018 of the petitioner, for not registering the complaint dated 26-03-2018 of by respondents 14 and 15 and not arresting the accused in Cr.Nos 130 of 2017, 46 of 2018, 47 of 2018 and Cr.No.56 of 2018 on the file of Station House Officer, Bangarupalyam police station as illegal and arbitrary and direct respondents 1 to 12 to withdraw the above crimes from respondent No.14 by registering the complaint of the petitioner and to entrust all the cases to the above rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police or any other Investigating Agency to investigate and prosecute the cases without insisting the 13^th respondent/Tahsildar for ownership report/survey report.

¶4

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home basing on written instructions submits that on the complaint of the petitioner, a case in Cr.No.77 of 2018 was registered and the investigation is under progress.

¶5

Besides written instructions, learned Assistant Government Pleader filed counter affidavit and submits that respondent No.15 was transferred from Bangarupalem police station to Mudivedu police station, Chittoor District and a charge memo was issued to respondent No.15 and cases were registered basing on the complaints of the petitioner and

¶6

¶7

investigation is entrusted to respondent No.18. In view of the same, the grievance of petitioner stood redressed. So far as the other prayer is concerned to prosecute the cases without insisting the 13^th respondent for ownership report/survey report, the investigating officer addressed a letter to Tahsildar, Bangarupalem for furnishing ownership/survey report of disputed land for the purpose of investigation and the same is awaited. This Court cannot decide the said aspects in the writ petitions. It is for the petitioner to prove all those facts before the investigating Officer and the investigating officer to consider the said aspects within a period of three days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶8

With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel to the disposal of this petition, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶9

_________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY,J

¶10

02-07-2018 Nvl

¶11

¶12

Bussa Rajendra v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bussa Rajendra v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

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

Konduru Dayakar Reddy Vs Central Board of Secondary Education

Yadandla Gattaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Khaja Hassan, Vs State of Telagana

Smt. Donapati Sujatha, Vs The State of A.P.

Smt. Changi Bai Vs State of Ts

D. Venkateshwar Goud, Vs The State of Telangana