The High Court of Telangana dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226 and Section 151 CPC challenging police inaction and seeking arrest of accused persons as infructuous, having been found no longer maintainable by the approach of the Court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
IMONDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF NOVEIMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
WRIT PETITION NO:4893 OF 2014
Betwee n:
Ravipati Pushpalatha, W/o. Venu lvladhav, Aged about 38 Years, Occ: Agriculture, D.No.7-1 1-9, 3rd line Lawyerpet, Ongole, Prakasam District.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RES'.NDENTS
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 issue an order or direction, moreparticularly one in the nature of Writ of l\ilandamus declaring the inaction of the Respondents 2 and 3 in not completing the investigation in FlR.No.94 of 2O13 of Manopad Police Station, lrilahabubnagar District and filing the final report, as illegal, arbitrary and u n con stitutiona I and consequently direct the Respondents 1 to 3 to complete the investigation by arresting the respondents 4 and 5.
WPMP. NO: 6068 OF 2014
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 2 and 3 to complete the investigation in FIR No.94 of 2013, dated 09.07.2013, of lvlanopad Police Slation, L,4ahabubnagar District by arresting the respondents 4 and 5, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. KOTI REDDY IDAMAKANTI
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR HOME
Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI N. HARINATH
Counsel for the Respondent No.S: SRI T. VIJAY HANUMAN SINGH
The Court made the following: ORDER
UIRIT PETITION NO. 4893 OF 2014
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO
ORDER:
Learned counsel for petitioner informs the Court that cause in the writ petition does not survive for consideration. Recording the same, writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions if any pending, stand closed.
SD/.N.CHANDRASEKHAR ASSISTANT REG
//TRUE COPY' SECTIO OFFICER
To,
'1 . One CC to Sri T. Vilay Hanuman Singh,Advocate [OPUCI 2. Two ccs toGp to' nori,lidn'dor"tiorin"Etat6of rel'angana at Hvderabad
s. Snltc toSri N. Harinath, AdvocatetoPUCl -Srl r. Vilav Hanuman Singh, Advbcate [OPUC] ;. O;; CC io ^ cHR 5 6, Two (r\s- cD cr- copies t-og-r' K"HqJ\ $'*.^"^-f' '\l'cJe(oP0t) \
\2
HIGH COURT
DATED:1 611112020
ORDER
W.P.No.4893 of 2014
1 H E s TA
(
c
O 2 0 !t0'/ 2U0
('
* {
..^.
DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COST
ssr) '
1@?'ul
-): Xs\u"--
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging inaction in investigation survives for consideration.
Ravipati Pushpalatha
The Superintendent of Police, Mahabubnagar District
The Circle Inspector of Police, Alampur Circle
The Sub-Inspect of Police, Manopad Police Station
Kanyadhana Sathyanarayana
Kanyadhana Ramalingaiah
P. Naveen Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
