Dismissed

Shoaib Ishaq Rahimuddi v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC20 Dec 2018WP/46284/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the Writ Petition for Mandamus. Relying on an identical prior order (W.P.No.14222 of 2015), the Court permitted the petitioner to approach the appropriate court regarding the withdrawal of a Look Out Circular, closing the writ petition without further order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Permitted to approach appropriate forum to seek withdrawal of Look Out Circular; Writ Petition disposed of on merits of prior case.

Shoaib Ishaq Rahimuddi Vs The State of Telangana — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI

¶2

WRIT PETITION No.46284 of 2018

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

¶5

“To issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the inaction of the respondents 2 and 3 in initiating action in consideration with petitioner’s complaint dated 15.12.2018 as illegal and arbitrary and contrary to law and violation of fundamental rights and ….”.

¶6

Heard M/s Khaja Manzoor Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Government Pleader for Home, apart from perusing the material available on record.

¶7

When the matter is taken up, it is brought to the notice of this Court that, in identical set of circumstances, this Court disposed of W.P.No.14222 of 2015 on 16.06.2015 and a copy of the said order is placed on record. The operative portion of the said order reads as under:

¶8

“In view of the above, taking into consideration the nature of controversy and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ Petition, permitting the petitioner herein to move the Court of XV ACMM Court at Nampally, Hyderabad, where C.C.No.179 of 2015 is pending and to make an appropriate application within one week from today seeking withdrawal of Look Out Circular (LOC) and it is also made clear that the petitioner is at liberty to set out the

¶9

¶10

reasons for making the said request including that he has already surrendered and has been abiding with the directions issued from time to time by the Court. If such an application is made by the petitioner, the learned XV ACMM, Nampally, Hyderabad shall consider the same in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders expeditiously preferably within a period of two weeks thereafter. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs”.

¶11

Following the above said order and for the reasons recorded therein, the present Writ Petition is disposed of, in terms thereof permitting the petitioner herein to approach appropriate forum of law.

¶12

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this writ petition, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶13

__________________ A.V.SESHA SAI, J

¶14

20^th December, 2018. Tsy

Shoaib Ishaq Rahimuddi v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shoaib Ishaq Rahimuddi v. The State of Telangana

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

K. Gangadhara Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Gangu Venkata Appalanaidu, Vs State of Andhrapradesh

N.Narayana Swamy Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Sivaram Theatre Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Gundla Raju Vs The State of Telangana

T. Pradeep Reddy Vs The State of Telangana