Disposed

R.Ravi Naik @ Venkat Ravi Naik v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC6 Mar 2024WP/2808/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the registration of a duplicate criminal case (Crime No. 202 of 2023) on the same incident as an earlier case (Crime No. 195 of 2023). The court directed the police to treat the second case as a statement under Section 162 Cr.P.C. in the leading case.

What did the court decide?

Direct respondents to treat Crime No. 202 of 2023 as a statement under Section 162 Cr.P.C. in Case No. 195 of 2023 and file a final report.

R.Ravi Naik @ Venkat Ravi Naik Vs The State of… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32s6 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD} (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF^MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{C.V. BHASKARREDDY}

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 2808 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

R.Ravi Naik @ Venkat Ravi Naik, S/o.^{Dulya Naik, aged.about 36 years,Occ.} Business, Flo. Jonalabogada. Thairda,^{Peddakothapally mandal,} Nagarkurnool District.

¶9

Mudavath Gopal Naik, Sio.^{RekhyaNaik, Aged about 43.years, Occ.} Agriculture, itio. Jonalabogada'^{Thanda, Peddakothapallymandal,} Nagarkurnool District.

¶10

Rathlavath Ravi Naik, S/o Chennya,^{Aged about 33 years, Occ. Agriculture,} R/o. Jonalabogada Thanda, Pedddkothapally^{mandal' NagarkurnoolDistrict-}

¶11

Mudavath Shiva Naik, S/o. Mudavath^{Laxman, Aged about 30 years,Occ.} Agriculture, R/o. Jonalabogada Thanda,^{Peddakothapallymandal,} Nagarkurnool District

¶12

..PETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

1 The State of Telangana, Rep^{by its Principal Secretary, Home Department,} Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶15

¶16

The Superintendent of Police, Nagarkurnool^{District, Nagarkurnool.}

¶17

3 The Station House Officer, Peddakothapally^{Police Station,Nagarkurnool} District.

¶18

4 Surva Ramesh Goud, S/o. Surya Jaqannadham^{Goud, Agedabout 23 years,} Oci. Agriculture, Rio. Jonaliboga-da^{Thanda, Peddakothapally mandal'} Nagarkurnool District.

¶19

..RESPONDENTS

¶20

Petition under Article 226 of the^{Constitution of lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed therewith,the High Court may be} pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order^{or direction more particularlyone in} the nature of writ of^{Mandamusdeclaring the actionof the 3rd respondentin} registering crime No.202¹²⁰²³ ot^{PeddakothapallyP.S. as illegal, arbitrary and} in violation of Article 14 and 21 of the constitution^{of lndia and (i) direct the 3rd}

¶21

respondent not to register any further crimes in connection with the alleged rncident that occurred on 5-12-2023, that is the subject matter of Crime No.195/2023 of Peddakothapally P.S., (ii) direct the 3rd respondent to treat the report of the 4th respondent in Crime No.20212023 of Peddakothapally p.S. as the statement under 162 Cr.P.C. statement in Crime No.195i2023 of Peddakothapally P. S. and (iii) consequenfly quash the proceedings in Crime No.20212023 of Peddakothapally P.S. against the petitioners.

¶22

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶23

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 3rd respondent not to register any further crimes in connection with the alleged incident that occurred on 5-12-2023, that is the subject matter of crime No.195/2023 of Peddakothapally P.S., pending disposal of the above Writ petition

¶24

lA NO: 2 OF 2024

¶25

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 stay all further investigation in Crime No.202 12023 of peddakothapally p.S., Nagarkurnool District against the petitioners, pending disposal of the above writ petitron.

¶26

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI C.SHARAN REDDY

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 3: AGp FOR HOME

¶28

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: -

¶29

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶30

{ I

¶31

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.^{V. BHASKAR REDDY}

¶32

WTTIT PETITION NO.28O8 OF 2024

¶33

ORDER:

¶34

The writ petition is filed seeking the following^relief:

¶35

". . . ... to issue an appropiate Wit, Order or direction^more particulartg one in the nature of Wit of Mandamus decloing the action of the 3rd respondent in^{registeingCime} No.2O2/2023 of Peddakothapallg P.S as illegal,^{arbitrary and} in uiolation of Articles 14 and 21 of tlLe Con-stitution^{of India} and (i) direct the 3rd respondent not to^{register ang} further cimes in connection with the alteged incident^{that occurredon} 5.12.2023 that is the subject matter of Cime^{No.195/2023 of} PeddakotLnpallg P.S (ii) direct the 3rd^{respondentto treat the} report of the 4th respondent in Crime^{No'202/2023of} Peddakothapally P.S as the statement under^{162 Cr.P.C} statement in Cime No.195/2O23 of^{PeddakothapallgP.S and} (iii) conseqtentlg quash the proceedings in Cime^No-202/2O23 of Peddokothapallg P.S. agaitst^{the petitioners......"}

¶36

It is stated that the petitioners^{were arrayedas accusedin}

¶37

Crime No.195 of 2023, dated 05.12.2023^{registeredfor the offences} punishable under Sections^{448,324,323,509,504 and 506 r/w 34 ot} IPC. The case of the petitioners^{is that on the same set of allegations,} respondent No.4 filed another complaint^{before respondentNo.3and} acting on the same, respondent No.3 has registered^{a case in Crime} No.202 of 2023, dated 26.72.2023 for the offences^{punishable under}

¶38

Sections 455,427,323,504 and506 r/w34of^lPC.

¶39

¶40

3 Learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that altering some of the sections, the respondents-police have registered another crime against the petitioners, which amounts to sheer abuse of process of law and the 2nd crime registered by respondent No.2 against the petitioners is not maintainable.

¶41

4 As the contents in Crime Nos.195 of 2023 and202 of 2023 are arising out of the common incident, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition directing the respondents-police to heat Crime No.195 of 2023 as leading case and Crime No.202 of 2023 as statement under Section 1,62 of Cr.P.C and file appropriate final report before the Court concerned in leading case

¶42

5 With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of.

¶43

No order as to costs

¶44

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending

¶45

shall stand closed.

¶46

SD/-A.V.S. PRA D ASSISTANT GI R //TRUE COPYII SECTIo OFFICER

¶47

To,

¶48

1 r:ia,iJ:;T'.'^{Secretary, Home Department,secretariat,Hyderabad,} state of

¶49

2 The Superintendent of police, Nagarkurnool District, Nagarkurnool.

¶50

The Station Diskict. House Officer, peddakothapally police Station, Nagarkurnool

¶51

4 One CC to SRt C SHARAN REDDY, Advocate [OPUC]

¶52

t Iy;"r:3;.lbGP FoR HoME, Hish court ror the stare or rerangana at

¶53

Two CD Copies

BSR BS

I ,

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0610312024

oR lHE S 14
c l(<br>o 2 0 tlAB 20!/4 z

*
PATCHEO

¶61

ORDER

¶62

WP.No.2808 of 2024

¶63

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION,

¶64

WITHOUT COSTS

R.Ravi Naik @ Venkat Ravi Naik v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Ravi Naik @ Venkat Ravi Naik 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

Chittumulla Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana

Dinesh Sharma Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Abdul Waheed (Since died) Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Kanchi Dinesh Vs The State of Telangana

V. Ramesh Babu Vs The State of Telangana

Pintu Koley Vs The state of Telangana