Disposed

Aakina Swathi, v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC22 Apr 2019WP/3378/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by the wife of an accused under NIA accused status, who sought directions to officials to locate her husband. The Court noted that authorities had already initiated Look Out Circular and Blue Notice actions, effectively dismissing the petition at the admission stage.

What did the court decide?

Disposed without costs. Parties at liberty to workout remedies if the accused is not apprehended.

Aakina Swathi, Vs State of Telangana — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA :: :: AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

IMONDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND NINETEEN

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 3378 OF 2019

¶7

Between:

¶8

Aakina Swathi, w/o Naveenkumar, aged about 31 years, house hold wife, H.No10- 50/5, Raghavend ranaga r, Khammam-50002, State of Telangana.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 State of Telangana, State-represented by the Principal Secretary for Home, State of Telangana Secretary, Hyderabad

¶12

2 Commissioner of Police, Visakhapatnam,-530003 State of A.P. Suryabagh, Visakhapatnam

¶13

3 Superintendent of Police, Visakhapatnam,-530003 State of A.P. A.U. North Campus, Andhra University

¶14

4 Superintendent of Police, Khammam, State of Telangana, Khammam Town 5 Station House Officer, Women Police Station, Khammam.

¶15

6 Assistant Passport Officer, Khammam Near Railway Station, Khammam-507001 7 Regional Passport Officer, Sucunderabad State of Telangana 8 Aakina Naveen Kumar, S/o Vasanth Kumar @ Srinivasa Rao, aged about 28 years, Padmashali by caste, Occ-Surveyor, resldent of H.No-21-1 14, Siddaradha B C Colony' chinnagadili' Visakhapatnam

¶16

..RES'.NDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of [/andamus to declare the inaction of respondents-2 to 5 in not tracing the whereabouts of respondent-8 and in not executing the N.B.W issued against respondent-8 who is AI in C.C.No-62412016 on the file of the learned 1st Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural^justice and in violation of the Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently, to direct respondents-2 to 5 to trace the whereabouts of respondent-B by executing the N.B.Ws pending against him

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2019

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to an interim direction to respondents-6 and 7 not to renew thepassport bearing No:H3246037 belonging to the 8th respondent

¶20

lA NO: 2 OF 2019

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to issue an interim on to respondents-2 to 5 to trace the Whereabouts of the 8th respondent and execute the N.B.W pending against him to pass

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G. U. R. C. PRASAD

¶23

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos. 1 to 5: GP FOR HOME (TG)

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

[,{P^1.e-

¶26

THE HON,BLE DT.JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶27

WRIT PETITION No.3378 of 2O19

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

This writ petition is filed seeking to declare the inaction on the part of the respondents 2 to 5 in not tracing the whereabouts of respondent No.B and in not executing the N.B.W issued against respondent No.B, who is A.1 in C.C.No.624 of 2016, on the file oF the I Additional ludicial First Class lvlagistrate, Khammam, as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural^justice and in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of india, and consequently, direct the respondents 2 to 5 to trace the whereabouts of respondent No.B by executing the N.B.W pending against him.

¶30

Heard Sri G.U.R.C. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G.Malla Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondents 1 to 5 and^perused the record.

¶31

The 5th respondent/Station House Officer, Women Police Station, Khammam, filed counter affidavit along wlth the copies of the documents annexed to the counter, to demonstrate the steps taken by the official respondents to execute the N.B.W pending against respondent No.B, who is accused No.1 in C.C.No.624 of 2016,^pending on the file of I Additional^.ludicial First Class l.4ag istrate, Khammam.

¶32

A copy of the letter daled 22.04.2019, addressed to the office of the learned Government Pleader for Home, is also placed on record, which reads as under:

¶33

IVP AY-

¶34

)

¶35

"1. The Addl., DGP, CID, Telangana, Hyderabad forwarded the Look Out Circular Proforma to Joint Director, Immigration Branch (IB), Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt., of India, New Delhi-66 on 29-03-2019 vide C.No.1593/IP/CID-T l2O19 for including the name of Respondent No.8 in the Look Out Circular.

¶36

Also on 03-04-2019 the Addl., DGP, CID, Telangana, Hyderabad prepared Blue Notice against the Respondent No.B pertaining to Cr.No.24l2016 U/s 498-4 IPC, Sec. 3 & 4 of DP Act of Women Police Station and sent to the Asst., Director, CBI, NCB India, Interpol, 5-8, 6th Floor, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003 with a request to initiate action for expeditious publication of "BLUE NOTICE" against Respondent No.8 vide C.No.1529/C3lIPICID1/2Ot9 dated 03-04-2019. The reply after publication of Blue Notice is awaited from Asst., Director, CBI, NCB India, New Delhi."

¶37

From the above, it is seen that the respondent oFficials have taken all necessary measures to^procure the^presence of respondent No.B and no Further action is necessary in this writ petition. However, if the respondent No.B is not apprehended in near future, the^petitioner is at liberty to workout the remedies available under law.

¶38

With the above observation, the writ^petition is disposed of at the admission stage. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any,^pending

¶39

in this writ petition shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

¶40

SD/- CH.VENKATESHWAR ASSISTA GISTRAR

¶41

//TRUE COPY//

¶42

S ECTIO OFFICER

¶43

To, 1. The Principal Secretary for Home, State of Telangana, State of Telangana Secretary, Hyderabad

¶44

The Commissioner of Police, Visakhapatnam-530003 State of A.p. Suryabagh, Visakhapatnam

¶45

The Superintendent of Police, Visakhapatnam-S3OO03 State of A.p. A.U. North Campus, Andhra University

¶46

The Superintendent o-f Police, Khammam, State of Telangana, Khammam Town

¶47

The Station House Officer, Women Police Station, Khamham. 6. Thenssistant Passport Officer, Khammam Near Railway Station, Khammam507001

¶48

The Re^g io na l_ P^a s.s.pof( Officer, Sucunderabad State of Telangana

¶49

One CC to Sri G. U. R. C. Prasad, Advocate tOpUCl

¶50

Two CCs to GP For Home, High Court Of fetangand. 1OUf1 10. Two CD Copies

I/p 1u-

HIGH COURT

DATED:2210412019

1rl E SiA IA
a:
ai
15 ilN 2l2C
Ll
;)-
-a<br>

¶55

ORDER

¶56

WP.No.3378 of 2019

¶57

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶58

r3 ,qv
A \y

Aakina Swathi, v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aakina Swathi, v. 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

Balerao Naveen Varma, S/O Gopal Varma,Occ. Business Vs Gurram Dayanand Reddly, S/O Narsimha Reddy

Class Iiiandclass IV Emp.Asscn Vs Salar Jung Museum Board and 3 Others

V.Seshagiri Rao Suryapet Nalgonda Vs K.Venkateshwar Rao Suryapet Nalgonda

K.Savitri Vs K.Yellaiah

Erukala. Naresh Vs The State of Telangana

M.Sambaiah and Another Vs P.Rajamma and 2 Others