This order directed the 3rd respondent to number the charge sheet as CC expeditiously after noting the absence of a CC number despite the filing of a charge sheet following an investigation.
Directed the 3rd respondent to number the charge sheet as CC and inform the petitioner.
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.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITION No.22420 OF 2018
O R D E R :
This petition is filed challenging the action of the 3rd respondent in not taking any action on crime No.49/2016, dated 16.03.2016 registered under Section 120 (b), 323, 406, 420 r/w.34 IPC and in not conducting enquiry against the accused though a period of two years has already elapsed.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
Though it is stated in the written instructions that a charge sheet was filed after investigation on 11.08.2017, since no CC number is given, it goes to show that either charge sheet is returned or not numbered.
In view of the same, the 3rd respondent is directed to see that the Charge Sheet is numbered as CC, as expeditiously as possible and inform the same to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition, shall stand closed.
_____________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J
26.07.2018 t k.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondent is directed to number the charge sheet as CC?
Whether the writ petition should be disposed of?
Petitioner
3rd Respondent
A. RAJASHEKER REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
