Disposed

Durga Harini alias Deepthi v. The Union of India

Telangana HC5 Sept 2024WP/2754/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the inaction of passport officials in impounding passports of husband accused in dowry cruelty cases, who were overseas. The Court directed the US Consulate to act on a previous notice to secure the accused's presence within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Consulate General of India, Houston, USA, to impound Respondent No. 8's passport within three months to secure his presence in pending criminal cases.

Durga Harini alias Deepthi Vs The Union of India — Dowry and Cruelty | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

[^{32e6 j}

¶3

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

¶4

THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEIVIBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 2754 OF 2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

Durga Harini @ Deepthi, Wo. Malayala Goutham, aged^{ab_out26 years, Occ.} Houie Wife,^-R/o H.No.18/DLCH' Colony, Saidabad Colony,^Saidabad, Hyderabad.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The Union of lndia, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of^{External Affairs} North Block, New Delhi.

¶13

2 The State of Telangana, Rep., by Prl Secretary to^{GovernmentHome} Department, TS Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶14

3 The Commissioner-Cum-Regional Passport Officer,^{Regional Passport office,} Chiranpur Lane, Begumpet, Secunderabad.

¶15

4 The Addl Director General of Police,^(NRl Cell^{Women SafetyWing),} Telangana State at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad.

¶16

a The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad^{PoliceCommissionerate,At} Hyderabad.

¶17

b The Deputy Commissioner, Hyderabad Police^{CommissionerateSaidabad} Division.

¶18

7 The Station House Officer, Saidabad^{Police Station,HyderabadPolice} Commissionerate.

¶19

8 Malavala Goutham, S/o Late Srinivas Aged about^{30 years, Occ.Software} Emplbyee, R/o H. No. S1/8205, Schivalaya^{Nagar, Vanastalipuram,} Hyderabad.

¶20

9 M. Suiatha, Wo Late Srinivas Aged^{about 49 years, Occ.HouseWrfe R/o H} No. Si/8205, Schivalaya Nagar.^{Vanastalipuram. Hyderabad.}

¶21

...RESPONDENTS

¶22

Petition under Arlicle 226^of the^{Constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavitfiled therewith, the High Courtmaybe} pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more^{particularly one in}

¶23

¶24

the nature of WR|T OF IVIANDAMUS, to declare the inaction of the Respondent No. 3 to 7 on the Petitioner's complaint Ot. 08-01-2024 for impounding the Passport and Visa of the Respondents No. 8 and 9 who are in USA and issuing of Lookout Circular against the Respondents No. g and g to ensure the attendance of the Respondents No. 8 and 9 in cc No.5039 12021 on the file of Hon'ble Xlll Addl chief Metroporitan Magistrate, Manora.lan comprex, Hyderabad, for the offences U/s 498-4 and sec 3 and 4 of Dp Act, and in DVC No. 24912021 on the file of lV Metropolitan Magistrate court, Hyderabad at Kalapatru is illegal. invalid and arbitrary and consequenfly direct the Respondents No. 3 to 7 to cancel the passports of the Respondent No. g and g during pendency of the crinrinal cases

¶25

lA l,lO: 1 OF 2024

¶26

Petitron 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 issue direction to the Respondent No.3 to 7 by directing the officials to take necessary action for impounding the passport and Visa of the Respondents No. 8 and 9 who are in usA and issuing of Lookout circular against the Respondents No. 8 and 9 to ensure the attendance of the Respondents No. g and 9 in CC No.5039i2021 on the fite of Hon'ble xill Addt Ghief Metropotitan Magistrate, Manorajan Complex, Hyderabad, for the offences U/s 49g-A and Sec 3 and 4 of DP Act, and in DVC No. 24912021 on the file of lv Metropolitan Magistrate court, Hyderabad at Kalapatru, during pending and disposal of the Writ petition.

¶27

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt S.VUAYA PRASHANTH

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 & 2: SRI M.VlJAy KUMAR,

¶29

SC FOR CENTRAL GOVT

¶30

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: SRI GADI pRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERIAL OF INDIA

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent No.4to 7: Gp FOR HOME

¶32

Counsel for the Respondent No.8 & 9: SRI K.RAMA KRISHNA

¶33

The Gourt made the following: ORDER

¶34

¶35

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

¶36

WRIT PETITIoN NO.2754 of 2024

¶37

ORDER:

¶38

This Writ Petition is Illed seeking the following reliel

¶39

".-..ro issue an appropriate uit order or direction more parlicularlg one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS to declare^{the inaction} of respoftdent lvos.3 to 7 on the Petitioners complaint^dated O8.O1.2O24 for impounding the Passporl and Visa of^respondent Nos.8 and 9 who are in USA and issuing of lnokout Ctrcutar against respondent Nos.8 and 9 to ensure the attendance of respondent Nos.8 and 9 in C.C.No.5039/ 2O21 on the fite of Hon'ble XI Addl Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Manorajan Complex, Hgderabad for the offences U/s 4984 and Sections³ at4 4 oJ DP Act and tn DVC No.249/2021 on the Jile of N ('\itropolitan Magistrate Court, Llgderabad ot Kolapatru is illegal, inwtlid and arbitrary and consequentlg direct respondent lvos.3^to 7 to cancel the passporis of respondeftt Nos.8 end 9 during pendencg of the ciminal cases.... "

¶40

Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record.

¶41

The case of the petitioner is that her marriage^was performed with respondent No.8 on 19.10.2019 as per Hindu Rites and Customs and soon after their marriage disputes^arose between the petitioner and her^husband, which constrained^her to file a complaint before Women Police Station,^CCS, Hyderabad and basing on the^said complaint,^{a case in Crime} No.640 of 2O2O was registered^against respondent^{Nos.8 and 9} for the offences punishable under Section 498-,{ of IPC^and

Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry prohibition Act. After completion of investigation, the police filed a charge sheet which was taken cognizance as C.C.No.5039 of 2O2L^'on the file of the XIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Manoranjan Complex, Nampally, Hyderabad. It is further case of the petitioner that she has also fi1ed DVC No.249 of 2O2l on the file of the IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad at Kalapatru and the same is pending for adjudication and even after issuance of Non-Bailable Warrants (NBWs) in the said cases, respondent Nos.g and 9 have not turned up to appear and therefore, the said cases are pending for securing the presence of respondent Nos.g and 9.

¶46

Sri S. Vijay Prashanth, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied upon the circular issued b.y this Court in ROC No. 1836/50-3/2008, dated 12.12.2005 and submitted that as per the said letter, the concerned Courts have addressed a letter to the Regional Passport Officer and the immigration authorit5r requesting them to impound the passport of respondent Nos.g and 9.

¶47

Sri M. Vijay Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for Central Government appearing for respondent Nos. I ancl 2 submitted that prior to submission of the complaint by the petitioner, passports were issued to respondent Nos.8 and 9 ..d "ooo rf...

¶48

¶49

¶50

receipt of the complaint, a letter dated 14.O7 .2022 was addressed by the Regional Passport Of{icer, Hyderabad to the Consulate General of India, Houston, USA to take steps for impounding of the passport of respondent No.8, so as to secure his presence in the pending cases. Learned Standing Counsel \ lfurther^{submitted that it is for the Consulate General of India,} Houston, USA to take appropriate steps on the letter addressed by the Regional Passport Officer.

¶51

¶52

Sri K. Rama Krishna, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.8 and 9 opposed the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶53

In view of the above submissions, ends of^justice would be met, if the Consulate General of India, Houston, USA is directed to take appropriate steps on the letter, dated 14.O7.2022 addressed by the Regional Passport Officer for impounding of the passport of respondent No.8, so as to secure his presence in the pending criminal cases, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and respondent No.3 is directed to communicate this order to the Consulate General of India, Houston, USA for taking further steps.

¶54

¶55

¶56

With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶57

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ

¶58

Petition shall stand closed.

¶59

¶60

so/- MoHD. lsMAtL ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// sEcnoN^(rr.r*

¶61

To,

¶62

The Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs North Block, New Delhi, Union of lndia

¶63

The Prl Secretary to Government Home Department, TS Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana.

¶64

The Commissioner-Cum-Regional Passport Officer, Regional passport office, Chiranpur Lane, Begumpet, Secunderabad.

¶65

The Addl Director General of Police, (NRl Celt Women Safety Wing), Telangana State at Lakdikapool, Hyderabad.

¶66

The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad Police Commissionerate, At Hyderabad.

¶67

The Deputy Commissioner, Hyderabad Police Commrssionerate Saidabad Division.

¶68

The Station House Officer Saidabad Police Station, Hyderabad Police Commissionerate.

¶69

One CC to SRI S.VIJAYA PRASHANTH, Advocate [OpUC]

¶70

One CC to SRI K.RAMA KRISHNA, Advocate [OPUC]

¶71

10 One CC to SRI M VUAY KUMAR, SC FOR CENTRAL GOW [OPUC]

¶72

11.One CC to SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, DEPUTY SOL|C|TOR GENERTAL OF lNDlA, High Court for the State of Tetangana at Hyderabad [OpUC]

¶73

12.Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Tetangana at 13. Two CD Copies Hyderabad [OUT] qr BSR LS

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0510912024

ORDER

W'P.No.2754 of 2024

{liE S14
1..rt
'; 12 wt; ?ri4
(i.
a
I
r,41'C H

¶79

DTSPOSING OF^{THE WRIT PETITION,} WITHOUT COSTS

¶80

?e 5[]i" "'n .fCoP'lE

Durga Harini alias Deepthi v. The Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Durga Harini alias Deepthi v. The Union of India

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

Ikar Outdoor Advertising Vs The Union of India

Elishala Somaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Pathan Apser Hussen Vs Bureau of Immigration

A. Siva Lakshmi Devi Vs The Govt. of A.P.

Sri Ugamraj Nahar, Vs The State of Telangana

Kistolla Durgamma Vs The State of Telangana