The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a petitioner seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the inaction of the third respondent in investigating a criminal case registered under various sections of IPC illegal.
No relief granted as the writ petition was dismissed.
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 P. KESHAVA RAO WRIT PETITION No.35017 of 2015
ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned
Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
The prayer sought in the writ petition is as under:
“… to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus to declare the inaction of the 3rd respondent in conducting investigation into Cr.No.144 of 2015 though the said crime is registered on 27.03.2015 for the offence u/Sec. 464, 466, 468, 420, 506, 447 r/w 34 IPC, as being illegal, arbitrary and unjust and to consequently direct the 3rd respondent to complete the investigation and to file charge sheet before the concerned Magistrate as expeditiously as possible and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”
The basic grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of registration of Crime No.114 of 2015 for the offence under Sections 464, 466, 468, 420, 506, 447 read with Section 34 IPC against respondent Nos.4 to 6, the 3rd respondent is not conducting any investigation.
When the matter is called, the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3, on instructions, submit that pursuant to the registration of Crime No.144 of 2015, investigation has been taken up and the investigating officer filed a report before the concerned Magistrate on 20.12.2017 referring the case as “the matter is civil in nature”.
In view of the above submissions, this Court is of the opinion that
no further cause would survive in the writ petition.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand dismissed.
_____________________ P. KESHAVA RAO, J
Date: 22.11.2018. ES
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking mandamus for conducting investigation and filing charge sheet survives when the investigation has been taken up and referred to be civil in nature.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner in W.P. No.35017 of 2015
Respondent Nos.1 to 3
Respondent Nos.4 to 6
P. KESHAVA RAO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
