Presenting a writ petition challenge involves instructions regarding a false complaint filed by the petitioner to escape arrest in a dowry case. The court allowed liberty to file a fresh complaint, noting the baseless nature of previous claims against the police constable.
Liberty to file a fresh complaint.
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.34972 of 2018
ORDER:
When the matter is taken up, written instructions dated 26.09.2018 furnished by the Station House Officer, Suryapet II Town PS, Suryapet District are placed on record by the learned Government Pleader for Home.
To the extent of their relevance to the present writ petition, the said instructions read as under:
“It is submitted that the petitioner has not given any report with the 4th Respondent Police Station i.e., Suryapet II Town PS till date. In fact the petitioner has also not given report dated 4.1.2018 to the DSP, Suryapet as alleged in the affidavit. A perusal of the report dated 4.1.2018 filed as material paper along with writ petition does not contain the seal and signature of the concerned officer/office. The petitioner herein without giving report either to the 4th Respondent PS or to the DSP, Suryapet alleging that no action has been taken on his report.
It is further submitted that the petitioner has given a petition to the Hon’ble Human Rights Commission, Hyderabad vide H.R.Case No.251/2018, dated 12.1.2017. The said complaint relates to dowry demand, which culminated into registration of a crime vide No.114/2017 u/s 498 (a) IPC and Section 4 and 6 of DP Act at Tungathurthi PS, wherein the petitioner was remanded to judicial custody. One Mr. Veeraprasad, working as Constable in Suryapet II Town PS is responsible for all the affairs. Therefore, requested to take necessary action against the said Constable.
It is submitted that, the Hon’ble Human Rights Commission referred the said complaint to the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Suryapet. The SDPO enquired into the matter and thereafter submitted a detailed report dated 12.3.2018 to the Superintendent of Police, Suryapet stating that the petitioner herein i.e., Ravula Bhasker hatched a plan to file counter case against his wife to escape from the case registered against him and approaching the authorities and also he is
2
wisely blaming Davoola Veeraprasad who is uncle of his wife and working as a Police Constable in Suryapet II Town PS and there is no involvement of Davoola Veeraprasad. The SDPO further reported that there is no necessity to take action against Veeraprasad and the petition filed by the petitioner before the Human Rights Commission is baseless and false.”
On noticing the above instructions, a request is made by the learned counsel for the petitioner to give liberty to the petitioner herein to file complaint afresh.
According to the said submission, the writ petition stands disposed of leaving it open for the petitioner herein to file a complaint afresh, if he is so advised for consideration of respondents. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions pending consideration, if any, in this
Writ Petition shall stand closed.
JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI
Date :24.10.2018 dv
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be granted liberty to file a fresh complaint regarding non-involvement of the police constable in a fake dowry case.
Whether the allegations made by the petitioner against the police constable require action by the court.
Ravula Bhasker
DSP, Suryapet
Suryapet II Town PS
A.V. Sessa Sai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
