Dismissed

Mr. Mahipatbhai Jesingbhai Dodiya v. the State of Telangana

Telangana HC6 Nov 2023WP/30119/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court permitted the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition filed under Article 226 and Section 151 CPC to file a private complaint with the Magistrate, dismissing the present petition as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition to file a private complaint before the Magistrate; writ dismissed as withdrawn without costs.

Mr. Mahipatbhai Jesingbhai Dodiya Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[3296 ]

¶2

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

¶3

IVONDAY. THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 30119 OF 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

Mr. Mahipatbhal Jesingbhai Dodiya, S/o Dodiya Jesingbhai, Age: 40 years Occ. Business, Rl/o. Anandpur, Tal. Kodinar, Dist. Gir-Somnath.

¶10

.PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 THE STATE OF TELANGANA, Rep. By its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

2 THE COMMISSIONER, Cyberabad Ranga Reddy DISTRICT

¶14

3 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, Shamshabad zone Cyberabad Ranga Reddy district.

¶15

4 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, Shamshabad, Rajiv Gandhi Airport, Ranga Reddy district.

¶16

5 MR CHERRY, S/o not aware Age 48 years, Occ. The Manager, Larson and Turbo Limited

¶17

6 PRASHAD RAO, S/o not aware Age 52^years, Occ. The Manager,^(Accounts) Larson and Turbo Limited

¶18

7 ARUP MANDAL, S/o not aware Age 35^years, Occ.^The Assistant Manager, Larson and Turbo Limited

¶19

8 ALOK KUMAR, S/o not aware Age 30^years, Occ.^{The Manager, (Billing} Section) Larson and Turbo Limited

¶20

MR. KRUP, S/o not aware Age 58^years,Occ. The^{P@ect Director Larson} and Turbo Limited All are resident of Rajiv Gandhi^{lnternationalAirport} Hyderabad,

¶21

...RESPONDENTS

¶22

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of^{lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{the High Courtmay be} pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring in the action of the Respondent^{Nos. 4 neither} registering the FIR nor taking action upon the complaint of^{petitionerdated}

¶23

I i

¶24

911O12023 rnsprte of d irection of the 3rci Respondent as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 21 of lhe Constitution of lndia and consequenfly direct the Respondent. No.4 register the FIR and investigate upon the complaint of petitioner daled 911012023 as per the drre<;tion of 3rd respondent.

¶25

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶26

Petition under Section .1 51 CPC praying that rn the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petitron, the High Court may bryleased to drrect the Respondent. No.4 register the FIR and investigate upon the complaint of petitioner daled 911Ol2O23 as per the direction of 3rd respondent.

¶27

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M.R. MOHD IRFAN

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 4: ASST. GP FOR HOME

¶29

Counsel for the Respondent No.5 to 9: - - - -

¶30

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶31

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

¶32

WRIT PETITION No. 3O119 of 2O23

¶33

ORDER:

¶34

After arguing the matter for some time learned counscl appear-ing for the petitioner requests the Court to permit the petitioner to withdraw this writ petition in order to take appropriate steps for filing a private complaint before tire concerned Magistrate's Court.

¶35

Permission as sought for is accorded.

¶36

Accordingl-y, the writ petition is dismissed as

¶37

withdrarvn bv gran ting liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedies as per law. No costs

¶38

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if

¶39

any, shall stand closcd.

¶40

ASSrsrAi?![.fgi{i.lJ //rRUE coPY// qp SECTION OFFICER

¶41

To, '1. one cc to sRl M.R. I\roHD |RFAN, Advocate [OpUC] 2. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State bf Telangana. [OUT] 3. Two CD Copies BN GJP t\o

HIGH COURT

DATED:0611112023

ORDER

WP.No.3O119 of 2023

e STAI€
.( oA
2l r'l[! ?t23 o
c)oq .>
4-
i
{)
l \d
OES F,.fi 0

¶48

DISMISSING THE WRIT^PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS

¶49

Mr. Mahipatbhai Jesingbhai Dodiya v. the State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Mahipatbhai Jesingbhai Dodiya 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

Hyderabad Leather Work Vs Visakhapatnam Steel Plant

Smt. M. Manemma @ Vadla Manemma Vs The State of Telangana

Rajamoor Ram Reddy, Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Rapan Venkata Jyothi Vs State of Telangana

Miryala Ramadevi Vs The State of Telangana

Vallapu Lingaiah Vs The State of Telangana