Dismissed

G. Naganna v. The State of Andhra Pradesh and 20 Others

Telangana HC11 Dec 2020WP/21263/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed the Writ Petition filed by a former Sub-Inspector challenging the police station's closure notice regarding his complaint under the SC/ST Act. The Court held that an efficacious remedy exists under the Code of Criminal Procedure.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner is granted liberty to avail remedies available under the Code of Criminal Procedure in view of the Special Act.

G. Naganna Vs The State of Andhra… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

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

¶2

FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶5

Between:

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO :21263 oF 2020

¶7

G. Naclanna aged about 58 years Sio Savaranna, Occ: Former SDpO,Gudlvada, l(rishna Dlst Rlo 2-)--12lBl\ Ftot No, G1, Dalfodil,s ApartntenLs, Durgabai De:,hmrkh Colony, Dagh Amberpet, Hyderabad 500 017

¶8

.. Pclllioner/s

¶9

/r l,lD

¶10

1, The Stalt oIAndhra Prac]esh t{cLlrcsctltcd tl'/ i'!5 t)rinclpal Scctciary, llome Dcpartnrefl, i,P. Sccrctnridt, Vclagapudi, Cunlur Di:,Lrict (4.P.)^- 522503, 2, The Statc of felanqana, P.cp., by its Principal Secretory, llome Departrrent, T€lJnqana Secreldriat, Hyderallad^- 500004, 3, Tlre Dlrector Gencral of Police,^(A.P,) Mangalaqir i, Guntur,4.t,.^-522 502 4, Tire Direclor General^{ol Police(T.5.),} Lakadikapool, Hyderabad^{- 500 004,}

¶11

P. Vislilva^f'rasad, The Deputy Conrmissioner^{OF Police,} Central Zone, Hyderabad^- 500⁰⁰⁴

¶12

CH Saidi Reddv lnsoector of^Policc iaiiabad Police^{StaUon, Hvderabad'500004'} 7 l.V. Ranrudu,^IPS D,rcctor Gcncral^{of Polrce(A P.) (Retd.)} It/o Gayatlrri^{Hills, Poad No loL} vl"Jq"O",^{t lYderabad- 500013} tl tl. P.Thak Llr,^II)5 o'".."',,"' Fornrcr^Acirjl. il'n^DGP D'ett0r^{(L&OXA Gercral 0f P )} ,^Pollcc :.'".:_:'' Pllllllllq, )LLlLrvrrUI ;,.; .,, ^^{.r{I '} ..^{St0rcs 0urcalrases Collrm,siion,.r.aLc,} l.iy,r;;i,;;::.;''rr'rrr''^{V'r't;awoda- 52ooI1'}

¶13

9 Nantc.^Nltknr)rvl r.oncral ot pollce Tllc Tllen^In5PCLtu'"-- ' ' ''r^" 1 0' I 0 20 I 4 ,.i,, li,,,l,^"i,li ;l;i; ' |i,:ii3i1i;:n I hrol ton ulre LLU| "" P^-s22 sr2 ilil.ilt"''i';;;tur^cri:r'r'ct' ^

¶14

10^p. Harl Kumar, tps. The Then DIG, EIunr I":"1\ly^!hu^{lnspectorGeneralor police (Lega,)} lnrougn utrector General of pohce (A,p.),

¶15

Mangalagirl, Guntur, A,p, - 522 502

¶16

_1-l _9^{v,j1 kLrmar,rps} yili: ; L: J ffi I :;:..1,^{.'p o'Ii c e, Ma c h,,i p a r n a m} Tltrough Director "] Gcncral of potice (A.p.), l,ian!dta9,ri, Guntu. U,sl rct, ,f.p, - SZZ SOZ

¶17

t2 S. D.Vrdhya Sagar,

¶18

The T)ren Add iunal SuDerinlenda:rt of PoL,ce (tletd.), llaclrii patrram, Tt,or-gh D:rqctor Ge,,erlt o[ po rce (AD),

¶19

flanqalagir!, Guntur district, A,D. - 522 502

¶20

i3 I'Jan.(:. l.lot krrr;rin

¶21

Cactl'Cl,-'[ (l.C. ) tr, :irc SL,0cr,ntL.f^.to1l cf lc ,.e, <rrslr"l d,,t.i, t, n.f, rs 0.. U8.10.2"r1.1 Through the Superlntendent of pol,ce, I"lrchi ipatnanr, K.lshna District, A.p,

¶22

14 N. Samba Siva Rao Director General of^police (A.p.) (Retd.) Through Director General of police (A.p.), Mangalagiri, cuntur district, A.p. - 522 502,

¶23

15 Harish Kumar Gupta Char,rman & Addl. DGp, State level Pol:ce Rec'u'tme1t Boa'0, O10 Director General oF Police (A,P.), Mangalagiri, Guntur district, A,P.^- 522 502,

¶24

16 l'1. Sathi Babu

¶25

Addl. Superintendant of^Pollce/ The Then Principal^{lnformationOfficer,} O/o Superintendant^{of Police,} Machilipatnam,^{KrlshnaDistrlct}

¶26

The Principal^{lnforrnationomceras 0n15.06,2020} And Aocll. SuperrnleldJnt^{of Poli'e,} Name not known, O/o SuPerir'rterrdanr^{of Po|'e'} l'1a c hlllPa tn^{d m, (r'shna Di:trt'-:'}

¶27

18 Y.B.P,T,^{A. Pr;:ad} ^ . - , rne Then SLrPO^{(DY 5 P ) GJdrvada'} Ttrrr-uqtr D,.ecro'Gentr:l^{of pol cc (A P )'} ;ruGuSir,^{(i'r"rlJrd 5l'itl' /t'P'- i22 507}

¶28

+1. +r?.t l'.rlir^{t.q.:,:i'^den:o' Dorce, S c & S r cey} l"lacn l.natnam,^{as ot uJ'Y'^iXli} lrui; rf^{zx:i,f Ti 1'"iT3l :i $ ! J :}

¶29

+1" iilXTr:i:;Xi^{sLrb'rn5pector(speciar Branch),as 14,10,20r4}

¶30

...RES'.NDENTS

¶31

Through the Superintendent of Police,^{l,4achilipatnam,Krishna district, A.P.} 21. N. Mallikarjuna Rao, Armed Reserved Constable^{Through the Superintendant of} Police, lt,4achilipatnam, Krishna District

¶32

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of^{lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed therewith,the High Court may be pleased} to issue writ i order or direction more^{particularlyin the nature of writ of} N/ANDAN/US thereby.

¶33

a. declare that the action on the^{part of the respondentNo.6 in issuing the} notice to the petitioner No, 437IOW/PS^{- SFB/2020 dated2310912020,with tacit} approval of the respondent No.5,^{communicatingthat the complaintdated} 09/09/2020 submited by the^{petitionerin the Police Station Saifabad,Hyderabad} was closed as the atleged facts therein^{do not constitute any cognizable offence} either under the SC and ST Act^{'1989or any other Law is ilegal andmalafide,as} such needs to be investigated.

¶34

b. direct the Superintendant of^{Police, CBl, Hyderabad 500095 to registerFIR} against the Respondentf numbers 5^{to 20, and also againstany otherpersons} whose role has to be invetigated^{inview of the abovesubmissions,under The} Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled^{Tribes (Preventionof Atrocities)Act 1989 r/w} applicable sections of the¹ PC^{1860and initiate further necessary action as per law} as stated in the complaint dated^O9/09i2020

¶35

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI^{T. KOTESWARARAO}

¶36

Counsel for Respondent Nos.^{1 & 3: AGP FOR HOME (AP)}

¶37

Counsel for Respondent^{Nos. 2 & 4: AGP FOR HOME (TG)}

¶38

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶39

¶40

\ !

¶41

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶42

WRIT PETITION No.21263 OF 2O2O

¶43

ORDER:

¶44

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

¶45

2, This writ petition is filed alleging that even though cognizable crime was reported, specifically alleging violation of the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, 'the Special Act'), whereas the Station House Officer, Saifabad Police Station, vide his notice dated 23.O9.2O2O, informed the petitioner that his complaint/petition is closed. In this writ petition, petitioner challenges the said notice of closure of complaint frled by him.

¶46

Learned counsel for the petitioner sought to contend that there was reliance on some report stated to have been obtained before closing the complaint, but in spite of the request made by the petitioner, the copy of the said report is not furnished and further contends that the Station House Officer could not have closed the complaint rvithout putting him on notice before enquiring into the complaint and without supplying the copy of the report.

¶47

In substance, the grievance of the petitioner is against closure of complaint filed by him without investigating into the crime reported by him registered under the special Act.

¶48

If the petitioner is not satisfied with the closure of complaint ',,rithout^{investigatinginto the sameunder the Special Act, he has}

to avail the remedies provided by the Code of Criminal procedure r/w the provisions of the Special Act. This Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition filed under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India when the petitioner has an effective and efficacious remedy under the code of criminar procedure r/w the provisions of the Special Act.

¶53

This aspect was dealt with by this Court in Govind Raju Sami v. State of Telangana and Othersr and the Hon,ble Supreme Court in M.Subramaniam and another v. S.Janaki and another2.

¶54

Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed granting the said liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedies as available in law. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, stand closed.

¶55

2^{2019(3) ALT1 39}

¶56

2020 SCC onlines.C. 341

SD/.K.AMMAJI

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTI OFFICER

To, 1. One CC to Sri T Koteswara Rao Advocate [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State^{of Telangana(OUT)} 3. Two CCs to GP for Home^(AP), High Court of^{Andhra Pradesh at Amarvathi} (ouT)

¶62