Dismissed

Anugu Amrutha, v. The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary

Telangana HC30 Jun 2023WP/34086/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition under Article 226 seeking quashing of criminal proceedings for matrimonial offences was dismissed as infructuous because the High Court had previously quashed the subject matter of the same complaint in a criminal petition filed by other accused persons.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous without costs.

Anugu Amrutha, Vs The State of Telangana, Rep., by… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32e9 ]

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 34086 OF 2015

¶7

Between:

¶8

Anugu Amrutha, Wo A.Vidya Sagar^{Reddy, Aged 50 years,^Occ: Housewife} R/6 Plot No. 12, Tirumaia Colony,^{NearChintalakuntaOId CheckPost,} L B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District.

¶9

...'ET'T'ONER

¶10

AND'1. The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat (T.S) Hyderabad.

¶11

The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad,

¶12

The Station House Officer, W.P.S.^{D.D, Nampally, Hyderabad.}

¶13

Patlolla Sangameshwar Reddy, S/o Ananath^Reddy, 4g9d_-5 J*y^eels'^O99;.. Agriculture rriork, R/o. H. No. 13-6-44631N8,^{Flat No.201} '^{TNRS VasaviVihar} Aats, Tallagadda, Mehedipatnam, Hyderabad.

¶14

...RES'ONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution^{of lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filedtherewith,the High Courtmaybe} pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction^{more particularlya writ} in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring^{the actionof respondentNo. 3 in} registering Cr.No. 582 of 2015 against^{the petitioner hereinas illegal, improper,} arbitrary, highhanded apart from being^{voilative of Article14 and 21 of} Constitution of lndia and consequently^{quash the proceedingsin Cr.No. 582 of} 2015 on the file of 3rd respondent^{against the petitioner/ accused No. 2}

¶16

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2015^(WPMP. NO : 43881 OF²⁰¹⁵⁾

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPg^{praying that in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition, the HighCourt maybe pleasedto} stay all further^proceedings against^{the petitioner/ accused no. 2 in cr.No.582} of 2015 on the file of respondent^No.3

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl.^{N. LAKSHMIDHAR( NOTPRESENT)} Counsel for the Respondent^{Nos.1 to 3:SRl.SAIRAM,AGP REP GP FOIHQI{|E} Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRl.^{S. BHARAT KUMAR(NOTPRESENT)} The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

{ 1

¶20

T II' HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.V.EN JGOPAL WRIT PETITION NO.34086 OF 2I)1Ii

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

The petit^,rrrer liled this Writ Petition u:rder A^-t.icle 2126 of the Constitut.i,rn c I India seeking issuance cf r'rrir o]' Mzrndamus declaring thi: lc tion of :he respondent No. ,l r n rr gis.tering Crime No.582 of ilo l5 against the petitioner and^()tirers as illegal, improper, arbi r:rry' and highhanded, apart lrom l--:ing violative of Articles 14 arrd 21 of Constitution of India anrl to cu,rstL the same.

¶23

No e-rresentation for learned col nsel Ii r the petitioner Sri N.Lakshnrir har and unofficial responden[ Sri -q BtLarat Kumar. Heard Srt S ri"am, learned Assistant Gove^-nmrrnt Pleader, representing -.ei .rned Government Pleader for lorrLr.

¶24

Lear nr:d Assistant Government Pk:acler, lrv submitting a copy of orier ir: C:r1.P.M.P.No.8992 of 2016 in Crl.t.l'lo.li164 of 2016 and Crimir-ra1 I etition No.8164 of 2016 and also Lhe case details, obtained frorri c n line, pertaining to Crl.P.No.lJ16.l ol 2016, submits that the srlbje( t matter of this Writ Petition i.e C rinLe No.582 of 2015, on the f ie of Women Police Station, )tr,^,1.,.1S, Hvclerabad, registered lor t re offences punishable under Se: .ir. ns 498-A, 406 and 12O of IPtl rd under Sections 4 and 6 of Dorvrr Prrhibition Act

¶25

I t

¶26

¶27

against the^{petiLioner hcreinancl others, u'ho are accused Nos' 1 to} 4,^.,r,as quashed by this^{Courtas per orders in Crl.P.M.P.No.8992of} 2016 in Crl.P.No.S164 of 2016^{and CriminalPetition No'8164 of} 2O 16 bl' relying upon the^{decisions rendered in YogendraYadav} and.others Vs. the State^{of Jharkhandr and Gian Singh Vs' State} of Punjab and another2^{and in that vieu'of the matter no purpose} will survive in this^{writ Petitionand therefore, no further ordersare} required and hence,^{seeks to dismiss the same as infructuous-}

¶28

4 . In view of the^{submissionsmade by learned Assistant} Government^{Pleaderand upon perusing the orders of this Court in} Crl.P.M.P.No.8992^{of 2076 in Crl.P.No.8l64 of 2016 and Criminal} petition No.8164 0f 2076, this court is inclined to dismiss^{the writ} Petition as infructuous.

¶29

AS 5. In the result, this^{Writ Petition isdismissed} infructuous without^{costs.Interlocutory applications, ifany} pending in this Writ^{Petition, shall also dismissed'}

¶30

12015(1)ALD(Crl. 12+0(SuPreme Court) SCC 303 '(2O12)10

¶31

//TRUE COPY//

¶32

SD/. P.Ch.^{NAGABHUSHAMBA} ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR #3o.on oFFrcER

¶33

to'1. ,*o CCs to GP FOR HOME ,High Court for the State of Telangana' at 2 3 Hlt"tliij:i#lt,nsprnmff^{ffi *rJ?J#,rJr} 4 Two CD Copies BM GJP

¶34

qs-

¶35

HIGH COUR.T