Dismissed

B.Mahesh v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC25 Jan 2022WP/3403/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226 and Section 151 CrPC seeking a direction to file a charge sheet. The petition was withdrawn by the petitioner after the Court noted pending investigation and failure to comply with notices. Permission for withdrawal was accorded.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition was accorded and the petition was dismissed as withdrawn.

B.Mahesh Vs The State of Telangana — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

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

¶2

TUESDAY. THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY^{OF JANUARY} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON,BLE DT. JUSTICE^{SHAMEEM AKTHER}

¶5

wRlT PETITION NO: 3403 OF 2022

¶6

Between:

¶7

B.Mahesh, s/o. Late^{B.Eshwaraiah, Aged about 42 Years,occ..Agriculture,Fl/o.} if''ronOJpaity Village, Shamshabad^{I/landal, Ranga ReddyDistrict'}

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

1 The State of Telangana,^{Rep.by its Principal Secretary,} .Department^{of Home'} T;6ng;;; Secretariat,^{Secreiaribt Buildings, at Hyderabad'}

¶11

The Commissioner of^{Police, Cyberabad, GachiBowli, Hyderabad'}

¶12

2 The Commissioner of^{Police, Cyberabad, GachiBowli, Hyderabad'} 3 The station House^{officer, Shamshabad Police Station (Rural),Shamshabad,} Hyderabad.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

PetitionunderArticle226oftheconStitutionoflndiaprayingthatinthe Circumstancesstatedintheaffidavitfiledtherewith,theHighcourtmaybepleased toissueanappropriateWrit,orderorDirectionmoreparticularlyoneinthenatureof writ of Mandamus^{declaringthe inaction of the respondentsin filing charge sheetin} FIRNo'639ol2021dated12l12l2o21onthefileofS.H.o.,ShamshabadPolice Station, Cyberabad,^{Ranga Reddy District under Sec'173of Cr'PC forthwith on the} complaint of the Petitioner against the^{accused persons'as arbitrary,illegal'} provisions of Cr.P.C and^{consequentlydirect the} capricious and^{violative of} respondents to^{act upon the FIR No'639 of 2021 daled1211212021in accordance} with law

¶15

lA NO:¹ o^F 2022

¶16

PetitionunderSectionl5lcPcprayingthatinthecircumstancesstatedin the affidavit filed^{in supportof the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct} the3rdrespondenttofilechargeSheetinFlRNo.63gol202ldatedl2ll2l202lon the file of S.H.O.,^{ShamshabadPolice Station, Cyberabad' Ranga Reddy District} forthwithpendingdisposaloftheabovewritpetitioninthisHonorableCourt.

¶17

Counsel for the^{Petitioner:M/S AHMEDLAW FIRM}

¶18

Counsel for the^{Respondents:SRI A' MANOJ KUMAR' AGP FOR HOME FOR} GP FOR HOME

¶19

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

¶20

¶21

THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶22

WRIT PETITION No.34O3 OF 2022

¶23

ORDER

¶24

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents tn filing charge sheet in F.I.R.No.639 of 2O2L, dated 12.12.2021 on the file of Station House Officer, Shamshabad Police Station, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District, basing on the complaint of the petitioner, against the accused persons, as arbitrary, illegal and consequently, direct the respondents to act upon the aforesaid F.I.R.No.639 of 2027, dated t2.t2.2OZI, tn accordance with law.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents Nos.1 to 3 and perused the record.

¶26

In the course of submissions, it is brought to the notice of this Court by learned Assistant Government pleader for Home that on three occasions i,e, on l3.lZ.ZO2l,2l.L2.ZO2l and 15.01.2022, notice under Section 91 of Cr.p.C. were issued to the petitioner to produce the relevant documents relating to the aforesaid crime. However, the petitioner did not choose to appear and did not file those documents. The

I I

respondent/police have also addressed a letter, dated 22.07.2022 to the Tahsildar concerned to collect the documents in relation to the subject crime. It is submitted that the investigation in the subject crime is^pending.

¶31

At this stage, learned counsel for the^petitioner sought permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition.

¶32

Permission is accorded.

¶33

Accordingly, the Writ Petition^is dismissed^{as withdrawn.} No costs.

¶34

Miscellaneous petitions, if any,^pending shall^stand

¶35

closed.

¶36

SD/.P,PADMANABHA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTiAR //TRUE COPY// A--' SECTION OFFICER

¶37

To,

¶38

One CC to M/S. AHMED LAW FlRlM, Advocate [OPUC]

¶39

lwo CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad lourl

¶40

Two CD Copies.

¶41

One Spare Copy.

IVP

NPJ

x.$,-

{*a,F--

HIGH^GOURT

DATED:2510112022

E SrAIt
1 Qa <br>a
oJ f'
ur 0I ttB ?-fl??
.;1

¶49

ORDER

¶50

WP.No.3403^{of 2022}

¶51

DISMISSING^{THE WRIT PETITION.} ;;ii;iiiDRAwN^{wrrHour cosrs}

¶52

41'l V

B.Mahesh v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Mahesh v. The 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

Mr. Mohammed Abdul Hai Vs The State of Telangana

K Sirisha Vs The State of Telangana and 2 Others

Jatla Shoba Vs The State of Telangana

Kodicherla Mahender Vs State of Telangana and 3 others

Mr. Syed Mutaher Hussain Vs The State of Telangana

Yarram Rajasekhara Reddy Vs The State of Telangana