Petitioner filed a writ petition against police authorities and respondents. The court disposed of the petition merely by placing written instructions from the Sub-Inspector of Police denying allegations on record.
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.
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI WRIT PETITION No.2650 OF 2018
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home (A.P.) appearing for the official respondents.
“It is reiterated that the 3rd respondent has never pressurized the petitioner to settle the civil dispute with the 4th respondent nor directed him to pay any amount to the 4th respondent at any point of time, as alleged in the writ petition. All these and such other allegations of the petitioner against the respondent police authorities are totally false, baseless and concocted only for the sake of filing this writ petition and the same are hereby specifically denied.”
2
JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI
Date : 09.03.2018 AMD
3
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI
WRIT PETITION No.2650 OF 2018
Date: 09.03.2018
AMD
Petitioner
Sub-Inspector of Police
Government Pleader for Home (A.P.)
4th Respondent
3rd Respondent
A.V. SESA SAI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
