Partly allowed

Smt. Golkonda Prathibha v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC11 Dec 2023WP/24135/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Telangana High Court held that the delay in registering the crime despite a judicial order indicated dereliction of duty by the Respondent No.5, directing them to pay costs to the Legal Services Committee.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No.5 to pay Rs. 5,000 to the High Court Legal Services Committee within two weeks.

Smt. Golkonda Prathibha Vs The State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 24135 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt. Golkonda Prathibha, Wo. G.Suresh, Aged 43 years, Occ. Pvt School Job, Rl/o. H.No.16-38, Nethaji Road, Badepallyvilage, Jadcherla Mandal, Mahabubnagar District.

¶9

.....PET]TIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

'l . The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Director General of Police, Telangana State at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Superintendent of Police, Mahabubnagar District.

¶14

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Jedcherla, [Vahaboobnagar Dastrict.

¶15

The Station House Officer, Town Police Station, Jedcherla, Mahaboobnagar District.

¶16

.....RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Cou( may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly in the nature of Writ of Mandamus in inaction of the Respondent No.5 in not registertng the FlR, inspite of a direction given by the Hon'ble Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jadcherla, Order vide CFR.No.1583/2023, dated. 19-06-2023, which is illegal, arbitrary, and also violation of Article 199, 200, 154 and 156⁽³⁾ of Cr.P-C. and also violation of Article 21 of Constitution of lndia and also against the Judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in LalithaKumari Vs. Government of UP and also violation of guidelines issued by the Central Government vide Circular No.1501 119112O13-SCIST-W, dated. 1211012015, and consequently direct the

¶18

Respondent No.2 to 5 to register the First lnformation Report on the basis ofOrders of the Honble Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jadcherla, Order, vide CFR,No.158312023, dated. 19-06-2023 and conduct the enquiry as per the law and protect Petitioners life and liberty. l.A.NO:'f OF 2023

¶19

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 Respondent No.2 to 5 to register the First lnformation Report on the basis of Orders of the Hon'ble Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jadcherla, Order, vide CFR.No.1583/2023, daled. 19-06-2023 and conduct the enquiry as per the law and protect Petitioner's life and liberty.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI Y.BALAJI

¶21

Counsel for the Respondents : AGP FOR HOME

¶22

The Court made the following ORDER

¶23

¶24

THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE C.V.BHASKAR^REDDY

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.24135 of 2o23

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of lhe Constitution^{of India,}

¶28

is filed by'the petitioner seeking the following^relief:

¶29

'.....to issue a uit^{or orderor directionmote particu\arlgin the nature} of Writ of Mandanrus in inaction of^{tLE Respondent No.s in not} reqisteing tlE FIR, itlspite of a dircction^giuen bg^{tlLe Hon'bleAddl-} Judicial Magistrate of First CrasE^{Jadcherla,Orderutde} CFR. No.1583/ 2O23, dated: 19-06- 2023, uthich^{is itlegal, arbitrary'} and also violatton oJ Arlicle 199, 200,¹⁵⁴ &^{156(3) of Cr.P.C.and also} uiotation of Article 21 of Constttution of India and^{o,lso qgainst the} Judgment of tle Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lalitha^kumaiV-{S} Gouernment of^(IP and aLso uiolation^{of guidelines issued bA the Central} Gouentment uide Circular No.15011/91/2O13-SC/ST'W,^dated: 12/10/2015, and consequentlg direct tlLe^{Respondent No.2 to 5 to} register tle First lnfoznation Report on the basis of Orders^{of the} Hon'ble Addt. Judicial Magistrate of First^{Class, Jadcherla, Order, utde} CFR. No.1583/ 2O23, d.ated: 19-06-2023 and cond^{ct the enquiryas per} the law^qnd protect Petitioner's life and libeng...:'

¶30

It is the case of the petitioner that^{when the police refusedto} register the cornplaint, which^prima facie disclosed^{cognizableoffence,} she was constrained to lile^private complaint on^{the file of Additional} Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jadcherla,^{and the learncd Magistrate} allowed the said private complaint on 19.06.2023 and^directedthe respondent No.S to register the crime. It is further^{case ofthe} petitioner the said order was dispatched to the respondent^{No.5 vide} Dispatch No.565/2O23 dated 2I.06.2O23 and even^{after lapse of two} months, the respondent No.5 has not registered the crime.

¶31

¶32

A counter afhdavit has been frlect by the respondent No.5 whcrein inter alia it is stated that upon rcceipt of the or.clers from the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jadcheria, a case in Crime No.566 /2023 was registered ou O3.O9 .2023 for the offences under Sections.448, 449,45O,38S, 387, 42O and506 IpC.

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that respondents have not explained the delay in registration of the crime, which action on the part of the respondent No.S would show callousncss attitude and therefore, prayed this Court to impose heavy costs on the respondent No.5.

¶34

The learned Assistant Government pleader for Home appearing for the respondents has submitted that even though the complaint was referred by the Court in the month of June, 2023, same was misplaced ald the subordinate staff has not drawn the attention so as to take immediate steps and there is no wilful/deliberate action on the part of respondents in registration of the crime.

¶35

Since the respondent No.S failed to explain the delay by giving proper reasons for registration of the crime q,ith inordinate delay of morc than two months, this Court is of the pima facie view that there is dereliction of duty on the part of respondent No.5 in registration of the crime. Thereforc, the respondent No.S is directed to pay costs of

¶36

¶37

Rs.5,00O/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) to the^{High Court Legal} Services Committee,^{Telangana High Court, Hyderabad,within a period} of two(2) weeks from the date of^{receipt of a copyof this order and flle a} copy of the receipt in the Registry.

¶38

7 . Accordingly, this writ Petition is disposed^of.

¶39

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand^closed. No order as to costs.

¶40

!Il I

¶41

//TRUE COPY//

¶42

SDI K. AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGIS RAR

¶43

SECTION OFFICER

¶44

To 1 . The Principal Secretary'^{Department of Home, State of Telangana at} Hvderabad.

¶45

ifr;"il;;t.r General^{of Police,Telangana State at Lakdikapool' Hyderabad'} l. The Superintendent^{of Police, Mahabubnagar District'} ;. iii; D;;;i, buperintenoent^{of Potice, Jedcheda, Mahaboobnasar District'} ;: iii; Si;i# iolse^{officer, Town Police Station, Jedcherla' Mahaboobnagar} District-

¶46

6 iil aC. to GP^{For Home, High Court for the State of Telangana at} Hvderabad. IOUTI

¶47

7 Ohe CC to Sri^{Y.Eialaii,Advocate} [OPUC] 8 Two CD Copies

SA GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:1111212023

ORDER