Dismissed

Sri. Podugu Naga Rambabu v. The State of Telangana and 6 others

Telangana HC16 Sept 2020WP/15602/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In W.P. No. 15602 of 2020, the petitioner alleged police inaction and failure to register a cognizable offence despite complaints dated November 2019 and March 2020. The High Court dismissed the petition after finding a pending civil suit (O.P. No. 980 of 2013) relevant to the case, deeming no immediate writ intervention necessary.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed not to register the crime and conduct investigation was dismissed; no further direction issued.

Sri. Podugu Naga Rambabu Vs The State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

WEDNESDAY ,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEIMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO:'15602 OF 2020

¶6

Between:

¶7

Sri. Podugu Naga Rambabu, Sio P S N lr/urthy, R/o H.No. 1-5-62111, Street No VV Nagar, Habisiguda, Hyderabad-500007,

...PETITIONER

AND

'1 . The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Prl. Secy. Home Affairs Department, Telangana. Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Deputy lnspector General of Police, Hyderabad City, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central Zone, Hyderabad

¶14

The Station House Officer, Nampally Police Station Hyderabad District.

¶15

Sri. Ramesh Chandra Sanghvi, S/o Late Sri Ramnikal Sanghvi, aged 63 years Occ. Business , Rlo. 3-4-255, Flat No. A, 1st Floor Kanakadurga Bhavan , kachiguda, Hyderabad- 500027

¶16

Sri. Vijay kumar Sanghvi, Occ. Business , S/o Late Sri Nandlal Sanghvi, aged 55 years R/o. 4-4-933 to 935, Flat No.204, Royal Plaza, Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad500095

¶17

Sri. IVanoj Kumar Jain, Occ. Auditor , S/o. Unknow, aged about 32 years O/o. Flat no.401 , NIalti Naik Plaza, Abids, Hyderabad -500001

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to rssue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more in the nature of Writ of [/andamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos.2 and 4 in not taking any action and in not registering the crime and in not conducting investigatron basing on the petitioners written complaints dt. 20th November 2019, 27lh November 2019 and 2nd IVarch 2020 as illegal, arbitrary and uncon stitutional and consequently direct the Respondent Nos.2 and 4 herein to take action and to investigate the same and also to register the crime basing on the petitioners written complaints dt. 20th November 2019,27lh November 2019 and 2nd March 2020 against the Respondent Nos.S to 7 herein.

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶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 direct the respondents No. 2 to 4 herein to register the crime and to conduct investigation on

¶22

the petitioners written complaints dt. 20th November 2019, 271h November 2019 and

¶23

2nd March 2020 pending disposal of the Writ Petition.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI K. PARIKSHITH

¶25

Gounsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4: GP FOR HOME

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.5 to 7:------

¶27

'I hc Court nrarle thc lbllo*ing: OItD!llt

¶28

¶29

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶30

WRIT PETITION NO. 15602 of 2O2O

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Home.

¶33

This writ petition is filed alleging that even though cognizable offence was reported on 20. I l.2Ol9, to the Station House Officer, Nampally Police Station, Hyderabad and simultaneously, marked copies to the higher authorities, crime is not registered. Subsequently also petitioner made complaints on 27.11.2019 and on O2.O3.2O20, no action is taken on the complaints filed by the petitioner and seeks direction to register the crime and to conduct investigation into the crime reported to the police.

¶34

During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner received a communication on his mobile phone informing him that crime is already closed as compromised. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought to contend that petitioner did not compromise and what is reported by the police is not correct.

¶35

It appears, from the material on record that so far no objection is filed on the information furnished to the petitioner about closing the crime as compromised, but straight away this writ petition is instituted.

¶36

The Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C), provides mechanism for redressal of grievance arising out of crimes and inaction / arbitrary action of the police officers and no steps are taken in accordance with the procedure envisaged by Cr.P.C., for redressing the grievance.

¶37

-J

¶38

According to learned Government Pleader, as per the instructions, furnished to him, on receiving complaint, G.D., entry was made and in the course of preliminary investigation, it was noticed that O.P.No.980 of 2013 is pending in the Court of Xth Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and accordingly, petitioner was informed of the same fact.

¶39

In view thereof, the prayer in the writ petition does not survive for consideration.

¶40

Thus, the Writ Petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to work out his remedies, as available in law, il he is not satisfied with the reply furnished by the police. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶41

s o^{/ -cj'dysE+x$rE} :B'rt+HhH

//TRUE^COPY//

sEcrf-Ffficen

To,

One^{CC to Sri K Parikshith' AdvocateIOPUCI} Hish^{court for the stateof reransana}

¶46

,l :llr::;1"r313",jfl"',"'

¶47

Two^CDCopies

Stll .-t/

L HIGH COURT

DATED:16/09/2020

ORDER

WP.No.15602 of 2020

1 t L4
a P.
lu s :l
F !C:
41'
o c (
c!
2
c(
c

¶54

DISMISSING THE WP

¶55

WITHOUT COSTS

¶56

t
e-
.5

Sri. Podugu Naga Rambabu v. The State of Telangana and 6 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Podugu Naga Rambabu v. The State of Telangana and 6 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

St. Regunta Vijaya Lakshmi, Vs The State of Telangana.

Mohammed Obeydullah Khan and Another Vs The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Smt. Dhulipala Padma Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

M/S.Vasa Rama Narsaiah,Nalgonda Dist,and 4 Vs Prohandexcise,Nalgonda Dist,and 3

Dwaraka Skyline LLP Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

Mirza Taimur Baig (Najam) Vs The State of Telangana