Dismissed

Syed Mohammed Maqdoon Hussain Soofi v. D. Appa Rao

Telangana HC10 Nov 2023CC/1728/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that the police officer was not liable for contempt despite apprehending the petitioner's son for cheating and breach of trust. The Court found the arrest following a valid Look Out Circular and due process did not constitute willful disobedience of Supreme Court guidelines regarding automatic arrests.

What did the court decide?

The Contempt Case was closed with no further orders necessary as the respondent was not liable for punishment.

Syed Mohammed Maqdoon Hussain Soofi Vs D. Appa Rao — Contempt of Court | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32s6 I

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY THE TENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C,V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1728OF 2023

¶7

Contempt Case filed Under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondeflt herein for wilfully violating, the guidelines dated O2.O7 .2014 passed by Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 1277 of 2017 (Spl. Leave Petition Crl. No. 9127 of 2013.)

¶8

Between:

¶9

Syed Mohammed fvlaqdoon Hussain Soofi, S/o Syed Mohammed Liakhat Hussaini, Aged about 70 years, Occupation. Business, R/o. H.No. 19-354918.110/11, Ali Nagar, Aliabad, Charminar, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

D. Appa Rao, S/o Not known to the petitioner, Age. Major, Occupation. Sublnspector of Police, RGI Airport Police Station, Cyberabad, Telangana.

¶13

...CONTEMNOR

¶14

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI- MOHD ASHFAO

¶15

Counsel for the Respondent : AGP FOR HOME

¶16

The Court made the following : ORDER

¶17

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.1728 of 2023

¶18

OROER:

¶19

This Contempt Case is filed by the^petitioner under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 seeking the following

¶20

relief :

¶21

"...to summon the Respondent and punish him under Section 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for wilfully and deliberately violating the guidelines dated 02.07,2014 passed by the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.1277 of 2017 (Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No,9127 of 2013) and it amounts to Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.... . "

¶22

Heard both sides and perused the record.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Syed Imran Hussain Soofi, son of the^petitioner is an accused in Crime No.327/2023 registered for the offences under Sections 408 and 420 IPC. Even though the offences alleged against the son of the^petitioner are^punishable upto 7^years, the respondent without following the procedure as contemplated under Section 41A Cr.P.C and also the^guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihart, apprehended the son oF the petitioner on 03.08.2C23. It is further subrnitted that since the respondent has not followed the procedure as contemplated unde,- law, he is

¶24

'1zov1tsg/zt:

¶25

¶26

liable to be punished under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act

¶27

¶28

A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent wherein inter alia it is stated that basing on the complaint dated 07.06.2023 lodged by one Harish Koosori, a case in Crime No.327 of 2023 was registered against the petitioner's son Syed Imran Soofi on the file of RGIA Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, for the offences under Sections 420 and 408 IPC. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer examined six witnesses, recorded their detailed statements and collected relevant documents. It is further submitted a check list was also filed on the file of XII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, at Rajendranagar, stating that it is a case of cheating and criminal breach of trust by Employee/A.1/son of the^petitioner. It is further stated that as the son of the petit'roner/A.1 was trying to leave India for Dubai, Look Out Circular was issued against the son of the petitioner/A. 1 and the Lucknow Airport authorities executed the LOC on 01.08.2023 and handed over the^passport of A.1 to RGIA Police Station and as such the son of the^{petitioner/A.1} was arrested on 03.08.2023 by following due^procedure and sent to judicial remand. It is further stated that son of the petitioner did

¶29

¶30

¶31

not complain before the Magistrate about harassment by the^police and subsequently, he was released on bail.

¶32

Admittedly, after registration of the case in Crime No.327/2O23 For the offences under Sections 420 and 408 IPC, when the son of the petitioner made efforts to travel abroad, Look Out Circular was issued against him on 01.08.2023 and he was arrested by the airport^police and his^passport was seized and sent to^judicial remand. Prima facie it appears that the respondent has followed the^procedure for issuance of Look Out Circular and after securing the^presence of the son of the petitioner, he was remanded to^judicial custody. Since there is no willful and deliberate disobedience on the^part of respondent in complying the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar's case (supra), this Court is of the view that respondent is not liable for prosecution under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act.

¶33

Accordingly, this Contempt Case is closed as no further orders are necessary.

¶34

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

¶35

¶36

//TRUE COPY//

¶37

Sd/. B. SATYAVATHI DEPUTY REGISTRAR

v SECTION OFFICER

To,

D. Appa Rao, S/o Not known to the petitioner, Age_ Major, Occupation. Sublnspector of Police, RGI Airport Police Station, Cyberabad, Telangana. 2. One CC to SRl. MOHD ASHFAQ, Advocate [OpUCl

¶42

Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] 4. Two CD Copies

nurrun [".--

HIGH COURT

DATED:10111t2023

ORDER GG.No.1728 of²⁰²³

¶47

S T Te
1
(
q I
L)
oo I I FF-B zut i)
*"1.
\ t D l c

¶48

CLOSING^{THE C.C}

¶49

o
-
I <br>

Syed Mohammed Maqdoon Hussain Soofi v. D. Appa Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Mohammed Maqdoon Hussain Soofi v. D. Appa Rao

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Sunkari Saidaiah Goud Vs The State of Telangana

Syed Shah Mahmood Hussaini Razvi Vs The State of Telangana

Enugu Krishna Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad

Kasani Narsimhulu Vs P. Rama Krishna Rao

Kasani Narsimhulu Vs P. Rama Krishna Rao

Dorashetti Mallesh Vs The State of Telangana