Disposed

Mr.Podili Naresh v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC6 Dec 2023WP/33014/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the arrest of the petitioner for cheating and forgery. The Court noted the aggressive nature of the offence and directed the respondent to follow Section 41-A of the Cr.P.C. and the Arnesh Kumar guidelines, subsequently closing miscellaneous applications.

What did the court decide?

No explicit relief granted; writ petition disposed of with case closed

Mr.Podili Naresh Vs The State of Telangana — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³¹⁸³ ]

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND T]WENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REODY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 33014 0F 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mr'Podiri Naresh' s/o.Narsimha, Age 41 years, occ ; Governrnent servant, R/o. H. No. 1 -7,^pothunoor Vi,age, eeOdavoia tvi#;i, tiatgonda District

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

'1 . The State of Telanoana, Rep by its principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Buitdin{, Secretiriatl Hvodijola^{"-" "'}

¶12

The Superintendent of police, Nalgonda, Nalgonda District.

¶13

The Deputy Commissioner of police, Devarakonda Division, Nalgonda District.

¶14

The station House officer, porice stition Gudipaily, Nargonda District.

¶15

Mr.Pidigam Srinaiah, S/o.Ramutu,4S.9 t1 years Occ ;Agriculture, R/o.Pothireddypafiy Viilage of p A piily [,rrhG[ Nllgonda District.

¶16

.....RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition Under Articre 226 of rhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particurarry one in the nature of writ of Mandamus decraring the action of the respondent No.4 in non following the provisions of criminar procedure code U/s.4rA and nonfollowing directions of Hon'ble Apex couri in Arnesh Kumar Vs.State of Bihar and trying to arrest the petitioner in cr.No.155/2o23 for the offence r-rts.42o trw 34 IPC' 156(3) cr.P.c., is illegal, atbitary and viorative of Articles 14, 15 and21 of the constitution of rndia and arso viorative of naturar justice and consequentry direct the respondent No.4 to follow the provisions of criminal procedure code uls.41-A and directions of Hon'bre Apex court in Arnesh Kumar Vs_ state of

¶18

Brhar in Cr.No.'l 55/2023 on the^{file of P.S. Gudipally and do the needful justiceto} the petitioner.

¶19

t.A.NO:1 OF 2023

¶20

Petition Under Section 15'1 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition,the High court maybe pleasedto} direct respondent^No.4 to^{followthe provisionsof criminal Procedure code} U/s.41-A and directions of^{Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of} Bihar in cr.No 155/2023 on^{the file of P.s.Gudipally and do the needful} .lustice^to the Petitioner,^pending disposal^{of the writ petition.}

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner^{: SRI RAPOLUBHASKAR}

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos.1to 4 : AGP FOR HOME}

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.^{5 :} --

¶24

The Court made the following ORDER

HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE^{B. VIJAYSENREDDY}

¶29

wRrT PETITION No.33014 OF²⁰²³

¶30

ORDER:^(ORAL)

¶31

This writ^petition is filed aggrieved^{by the actionof respondent} No.4-Station House Officer,^{GudipallyPolice Station, Nalgonda} District, in trying to arrest the^{petitionerin connectionwith Crime} No.155 of 2023 registered^{for the offence under Section 420 read with} 34 IPC without following^{the procedure contemplatedunderSection} 41-A oI Cr.P.C and the^{directionsissued by the Honourable Apex} Court in Arnesh Kumar^{vs. Stateof Biharl.}

¶32

Heard learned counsel for^{the petitioner andlearnedAssistant} Government Pleader for^{Home, and perused the material availableon} record.

¶33

Learned Assistant Government^{Pleader for Home fairly} submitted that the^{punishment prescribedfor the offencealleged} against the^{petitioneris upto seven years and respondent No.4 would} follow the^{guidelinesformulated by the Honourable Apex Courtin} Arnesh Kumar's case^(suPra).

¶34

Recording the aforesaid^{submissions of the learned Assistant} Government Pleader^{for Home, the writ petition is disposed of. No} order as to costs.

'(2014)^{8 scc 273}

BVR.J W.P.No.l30l4 2023

¶40

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any,^pending

¶41

in the writ petition stand closed

¶42

//TRUE^COPY'/

¶43

'i,t8TEfrTfltt.}#FII t'

¶44

SECTION,OFFICER

¶45

,o ,. -,-n" principal Secretary. Home Department,^{Secretariat Building'secretariat}

¶46

;?r;i$ii,'fffi^{:t';"v;:$ilt'r33;)'xesffi Br*r:Nas'nda}

¶47

District

¶48

iIr"r",s:1:H"t"":,[H:'-iJf,^{%.",iX?:,?#*''"1'+g?]E?,'51"'}

¶49

Hvderabad [OUt I ,t, Bhaskar, Advocate [OPUCI Oh"^{CCto Sri RaPoRaPo}

¶50

Oh"^{CCto Sri RaPoRaPo}

¶51

7 Two^{CD CoPtes}

SA LS

HIGH COURT

DATED:0611212023

1 re c
v
I
C)
14 ult 7t2]
oo
t
DE 5 Fr.'t(

ORDER

WP.No.33014 ot 2023

DISPOSING OF THE W.P

WITHOUT COSTS.

Q'x

Mr.Podili Naresh v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Podili Naresh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mulukuri Komal Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

G. Padhmaja Vs The State of Telangana and 3 Others

Mohd. Fayaz Ahmed Vs The State of Telangana

Mahesh Bodusu Vs The State of Telangana

Bollepaka Jangaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Lalkota Sudhakar Vs The State of Telangana