Dismissed

M.Kishore Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC10 Jul 2018WP/19490/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction to the Sub Inspector of Police to conduct an investigation and file a charge sheet in unsatisfactory delay. The court noted the police had filed a final report due to lack of prima facie case. As the petitioner denied receipt of the final report notice without proof, the court directed service of notice and dismissed the petition after givin

What did the court decide?

Notice served on petitioner; petitioner may approach 4th respondent after receipt.

M.Kishore Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶2

W.P.NO.19490 OF 2018

¶3

O R D E R

¶4

Based on the report of the petitioner, 4^th respondent – Sub Inspector of Police, registered the case in Crime No.199/2017 against unofficial respondents 5 to 9 for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 447, 323, 506-II read with Section 34 IPC. Alleging that though the crime was registered in the year 2017, the 4^th respondent is not conducting investigation, the present writ petition is filed for a direction to the 4^th respondent to conduct investigation and to file charge sheet.

¶5

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶6

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home produced written instructions of the 4^th respondent denying the allegations of the petitioner. In the written instructions, it is stated that in pursuance of registration of the above crime, 4^th respondent examined eight witnesses and found no prima facie case and, therefore, addressed letter to the Sub Divisional Police Officer, (SDPO) Eluru Sub-Division, Eluru on 13.10.2017, to accord permission to refer the case as ‘false’. Vide proceedings in C.No.1035/SDO.E/Ref/2017 dated 30.11.2017, the SDPO accorded permission and a copy of notice was served on the petitioner on 14.06.2018 and final report has been filed before the II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Bhimdole on 18.06.2018 in S.R.No.2693 of 2018.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, denies the receipt of notice stated to have been served by the 4^th respondent on 14.06.2018.

¶8

Since the petitioner is disputing the receipt of notice on 14.06.2018 and the 4^th respondent has not filed any proof of acknowledgement, he shall serve notice on the petitioner and thereupon, it is open for him to avail the remedies available under law.

¶9

With the above direction, writ petition is disposed of.

¶10

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. No costs.

¶11

-------------------------------------------------------- A.RAJASHEKER REDDY,J

¶12

DATE:10—07—2018 AVS

M.Kishore Kumar v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Kishore Kumar 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

Mohammed Tariq Yousuf, Vs The State of Telangana

Vels Education Society, Vs Dental Council of India

Spectrum Enterprises Vs Union of India

Zia-Ui-Islam Educational Society Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Chinthireddy Kodanda Ram Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Meghana constructions Vs The Govt. of Telangana