Disposed

T. Leelavathi v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC10 Dec 2018WP/3795/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging alleged non-conduct of investigation, the High Court noted that a case was registered following a private complaint. Noting the pendency of an interim stay petition, the court discharged the police of allegations of wrongdoing and directed them to complete the investigation expeditiously and file a final report.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to complete investigation in Cr.No.14 of 2016 expeditiously and file final report before competent court if no interim order exists.

T. Leelavathi Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh — Telangana HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE A.V.SESHA SAI

¶2

W.P.No.3795 of 2018

¶3

O R D E R:

¶4

Today, when the matter is called, written instructions deposed by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Vayalpad Police Stastion, Chittoor District is placed on record. A.S.Nagar Police Station, Vijayawada City, Krishna District is filed. Paragraphs 2 to 4 of the written instructions read as follows:

¶5

“2. It is submitted that it is fact that the petitioner herein filed private complaint before the Hon'ble JFCM Court, Valmikipuram against one Balisetty Raghavulu & 3 others. The said private complaint was forwarded to the Vayalpad P.S., for investigation. Accordingly, basing on the same, a case in Cr.No.14/2016, dt. 28.01.2016, u/s. 498-A, 420, 403 r/w. 34 1PC & Section 156 (3) Cr.PC, was registered on the file of the Vayalpad Police Station against one Balisetty Raghavulu & 3 others and investigation was taken up. The contention of the petitioner that he has earlier filed complaint before the police station and no action was taken thereon by the Vayalpad P.S., is not correct and denied.

¶6

It is submitted that during the course of investigation in Cr.No. 14/2016, the investigating officer has examined (5) witnesses and recorded their statements. While the investigation was in progress, the accused in Cr.No.14/2016 have filed Crl.P No. 8156/16 u/s. 482 or Cr.PC before this Hon ble Court, wherein this Hon'ble Court by orders dated 15.06.2016, in Crl.M.P.No. 8984/16, in Crl.P.No. 8156/16, was pleased to grant interim stay of all further proceedings in FIR No. 14 of 2016 or Vayalpadu P.S., Chittoor District, including the arrest of the petitioners, which has been further extended by orders dt. 01.08.2016 & 27.09.2016 in Crl.P.No. 8156/16. The said Crl.P.No. 8156/16 is still pending on the file of the Hon'ble Court.

¶7

In view of the circumstances stated supra, the investigation Cr.No. 14/2016 could not be proceeded with further. Apart from that, the petitioner herein, being the 2nd respondent in Crl.P.No. 8156/16, is also aware of the above-said facts. Inspite of the same, the

¶8

¶9

petitioner herein has filed present writ petition, making allegations against the Vayalpad Police about non-conduct of investigation'-in Cr.No.14/16. Therefore, all the allegations of the petitioner in the writ petition against the respondent police authorities are totally false, baseless and hereby specifically denied.”

¶10

Having regard to the contents in the above said paragraphs of the counter affidavit and keeping in view the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to complete the investigation in Cr.No.14 of 2016 as expeditiously as possible and file final report before the competent Court if there is no interim order existing as on today.

¶11

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶12

______________ A.V.SESHA SAI, J

¶13

Date: 10.12.2018 Grk/DA

¶14

¶15

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE A.V.SESHA SAI

¶16

W.P.No.3795 of 2018

¶17

10.12.2018

¶18

grk

T. Leelavathi v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T. Leelavathi 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lakavath Mansingh, Vs The State of Telangana

Ramagiri Dhanalaxmi Vs The State of Telangana

B. Pothanna Yadav Vs The State of Telangana

Karri Brahma Reddy, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Purre Vijaya Kalavathi, Vs The state of Andhra Pradesh

Smt. G.Madhavi Latha Vs The State of Telangana