Petitioner sought Writ Jurisdiction direction to CID to register an FIR under Section 154 Cr.P.C. supposedly pursuant to a Division Bench order which this Court clarified contained no such directive, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition for lack of merits.
The writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.
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)
WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION NO: 14249 OF 2021
Betwee n:
SYED ZAKIR HUSSAIN, S/o Syed ltAuzaffar Hussain, Aged about 49 years, Occ. Business, R/o H.No.B-15-92/1, Akber Colony, Vattepally, Hyderabad - 53.
...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndiapraying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bepleased to order 3'd Respondent CID to issue FIR under section 154 of Cr. P. C. in compliance to the order of the Hon'ble High Court in W.A. No 423 of 2020, order dated711012020
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI V.SIVA PRASAD
Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR HOME
The Court made the following: ORDER
HON'I}LE SRI JUS'TICE K. LAKSHMAN
WRIT PIITITION No.l.1249 OF 202 I
oRDt.]t:
'fhis rvrit petition is llled seeking a direcrion ro respondent No.3, CID, to registera liesh complaint under Section - 154 olCr.p.C. in cornpliance of the order dated 07.10.2020 in W.A. No.423 o1'2020
t*
W.P. No.14249 of202l
2
\
"In thc prescnt case. the appellant- in-pcrson had sought dircctiorls lio:n the lcarned Single.ludge to dircct the Cl.l.D."to rcgistera lresh corrplaint. to invcstigate. to prosccutc. and topunishthe respollsible persons for producing lake divorcecertificates". Obviously, a complaint can be registered asan F.l.R. only under the provisions of Section 154 of Cr.P.C.The investigation.if successful, would lead to the filing of thechallan/charge-sheet.If the prosecution could establish its casebeyond areasonable doubt, the trial would end in conviction,and punishmentof the respondents. Thus, obviously, the reliefthat was soughtby the petitioner from the leamed Single Judge was within the criminal jurisdiction. Hence, keeping in mind the principle enunciated by the Apex Court,quoted above.no intra-courtappeal would lie against thc irnpugned order."
I
KLJ tt. P. l'o.11219 of 2021
3
respondent No.7 therein viz., Chief Qazi Otlice ol Qazzath arrd another fake certitlcate dated 23.09.1999 llled in W.P. No.9698 of 200 l.'l'he said writ petition was dismissed on 07.11.2001, giving liberty to pref'er a private complaint befbre the concemed Magistrate fol appropriate action. Pursuant to the said order, the petitioner filed complaints on different dates and the same were registered as Crime Nos.97 and 98 of 2002 on the file of Charminar Police Station, Hyderabad; No.56 of 2002 on the file of Hussaini Alam Police Station, Hyderabad; and No.258 of 2003 on the file of Women Police Station, South Zone, Hyderabad.
::::=
tl/.P. No.14249 of202 t {
sheet and the same was taken on file as C.C. No.207 of 2002. However, later the said case was ended in acquittal vide order dated 1 5.03.200s
i
KL,J ll.l'. No. 11219 o/ 2021
5
that the case was rel-erred to be 'action dropped' in the month of January, 2004 itself. On 24.01 .2013, the petitionel furnished two addresses of his wife. As crime Nos.56 and 57 of 2002 ended in acquittal, letter dated 18.02.2013 was addressed to the public Prosecutor, Criminal Courts, Nampally, Hyderabad for opinion as to whether the police can arrest the wife of petitioner or not. On 15.03.2013, a petition was also filed under Section 173 (viii) of Cr.P.C. before the XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, for seeking permission to reopen the case for t'urther investi gation.
i) In fhct. the petitioner has also filed a cornplaint belbre the Lokayukta on 01.04.20 l3 stating that there was no progress in investigation in Crime No.258 of 2003. Upon receipt of letter from the Lokayukta, the Commissioner of Police, Submitted enquired into the said aspect and submitted information to the Lokayukta on 30.07.2013 stating that the allegations levelled by the petitioner do not require any action.
ii) However, Crime No.258 of 2003 was reopened and further investigation was done, and sent two police constables to the places whe're the wif'e of petitioner would be available. During their visits, it was revealed that the wit'e o1'petitioner got married to another person and living Abroad with her husband since five years and that the petitioner herein also got another ntariage and livirrg with his rvil'e. BasEd=on further investigation and evidence, a tinal report dated
l1'.P. .'o.lJ)1a of 2Dl
6
24.12.2013 was filed before the XV Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, on the ground of 'lack of evidence'. In the said finai report, it was stated by the police that the petitioner neither tumed up to Women Police Station, South Zone, nor produced any witnesses relating to the case for the past nine years and he went abroad for his livelihood. After lapse of nine years, the petitioner submitted a letter under Right to Inlormation Act, 2005, rvith regard to stage ol'crinre, and the police lurnished the inlolrnation as the case was relened to as 'action dropped'.
I l. A perusal of the record would also reveal that the writ petition filed by the petitioner herein vide W.P. No.36972 of 2013 was dismissed by this Court with the findings mentioned above. The writ appeal No.423 of 2020 filed by the petitioner is also dismissed vide order dated 07.10.2020. In the said writ appeal, according to the petitioner, the Division Bench of this Court ordered to issue FIR on the complaint filed by the petitioner under Section - 154 of Cr.P.C. and lurther directed to investisate and il it is successfullv. to file charge sheet and r"rpon successful trial by prosecution lead to conviction of accused. Respondent No.4 herein is respondent No.3 in the said rvrit appeal. But. as discussed above, the writ petition liled by the petitioner herein i.e.. W.P. No.36972 of 20 l3 rvas dismissed b-v this Court 'u'ide order dated 27.01.2020. The above said r'vrit appeal No.423 of 2020 rvas also dismissed. In the said writ appeal, there is no direction to respondent No.3 herein to register an FIR, conduct
I
Kt, ,t ll l' \tr I Jll9 ,l )0) l
investigation and file charge sheet. The Division Bench in the above appeal has discussed that the petitioner herein had sought directions from the learned Single Judge to direct the CID to register a fresh complaint, to investigate, to prosecute, and to punish the responsible persons for producing fake divorce certiflcates.
13, It appears that the petitioner herein is under misconception that the Division Bench has directed r.espondent No.3 herein to register an FII{, investigate into the sane and tile charge sheet. There is no such direction by the Division Bench in the order passed in the said writ appeal, and in fact, the said writ appeal was dismissed. Even, in the letter dated 08.01.2020 issued by respondent No.3 _
ll'.1) ,t\1'o.lJ)J9 .t )n) t
8
Deputy Superintendent of police, EOW, CID, Hyderabad also, it is specifically informed to the petitioner herein that there is no such direction in the order dated 07. 10.2020 in W.A. No.423 of 2020. Even then, the petitioner herein has filed the present writ petition seeking a direction to respondent No.3 to register a fresh complaint under Section - 154 of Cr.p.C. in compliance of the order dated 07.10.2020 in W.A. No.423 of 2020. According to this Court, the petitioner failed to make out any case and the writ petition is devoid of rrerits and, therefbr.e,, the same is liable to be dismissed.
However. there shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, rniscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ
Petition shall stand closecl.
SD/- I.NAGALAKSHMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SECTION OFFICER
To
Ki. r ' d.11 )
n,
-------..,.:>r--
HIGH COURT
DATED:1410712021
ORDER
WP.No.14249of 2021
&
e STAre,
O1
a
a(
)
() 3O JUL r0?1 ]J
*
i
:.
DISMISSING THE WRITPETITON WITHOUT COSTS.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Division Bench order in W.A. No.423 of 2020 directed Respondent No.3 to register an FIR under Section 154 Cr.P.C.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
SYED ZAKIR HUSSAIN
GOVERNMENT OF TELANGANA
DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
K. LAKSHMAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
