Dismissed

Banothu Lakshmi v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC2 Jan 2024WP/34129/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Telangana High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the non-registration of a criminal complaint by the Station House Officer. The Court found that a case had been registered and investigation initiated post-complaint, redressing the grievance and closing the petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was closed as the grievance regarding non-registration of the complaint stands redressed.

Banothu Lakshmi Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY,THE SECOND DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 34129 OF 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

Banothu Lakshmi, W/o Shankar Naik, Aged about 32 years, Occ. agriculture, Rl/o H. No 4-11812, Aliya Thanda, Singareni Mandal, Khammam District

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Director General of Police, Lakdika-pool, Hyderabad

¶14

The Commissioner of Police, Khammam, Venkatagiri Road, At Khammam Town,Khammam District,

¶15

The Asst.Commissioner of Police, Khammam Rural, at Khammam, Khammam District

¶16

The Station House Officer, Karepally P.S., Khammam District

¶17

Pachipala Venkateswarlu @ Alias Venkat Mechanic, S/o.Pachipala Ramulu, Aged about 33 years, Occ. Business, Resident of Usirikayapalli Village, Singareni Mandal, Karepalli, Khammam District

¶18

Pachipala Akash, S/o. Pachipala Ailaiah Aged about 25 years, 0cc. Business, Resident of Usirikayapalli Village, Singareni Mandal, Karepalli, Khammam District.

¶19

8- Pachipala Madhumathi, D/o. Pachipala Ailaiah Aged aboul 27^years, Occ. Employee, Resident of Usirikayapalli Village, Singareni Mandal, Karepalli, Khammam District

¶20

Pachipala Badraiah, S/o. Pachipala Guruvaiah, Aged about 63^{years, Occ} Retired Government Servant Resident of Usirikayapalli Village, Singareni Mandal, Karepalli, Khammam District.

¶21

Rasabandi Chiranjeevi, S/o Bikshamaiah, Aged about 33^{years, Occ} Business, Resident of Usirikayapalli Village, Singareni Mandal,^Karepalli, Khammam District

¶22

ll.Rasabandi Nageswar, S/o Bikshamaiah, Aged about 33^{years,OccBusiness,} Resident of Usirikayapalli Village, Singareni Mandal, Karepalli,^Khammam District

¶23

...RE'P.NDENTS

¶24

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution^{of lndiapraying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the^{High Court may be} pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more^particularly one in the nature^of writ of the Mandamus declaring the action of the^{SthRespondentin not}

¶25

registering the crime on the complaint of the petitioner dated 03/10/2023 is illegal, arbitrary and against the rights guaranteed by the Constitution of lndia lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶26

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 5thRespondent to register the First lnformation Report on the petitioner complaint dated 03/10/2023 pending disposal of the above writ petition

¶27

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. ANGOTHU NEHRU

¶28

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos. 1to5: AGP FOR HOME

¶29

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶30

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BIIASKAR REDDY

¶31

WRIT PETITION No.34 729 of 20.23 ORDER:

¶32

This Writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is liled seeking to declare the action of respondent No.5 in not registering the crime on the complaint of the petitioner, dated 03.7O.2023, as arbitrary, illegal and against the rights guaranteed by the constitution of India.

¶33

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government pleader for Home, appearing for respondent lrlos.l to 5 and perused the record.

¶34

The case of the petitioner is that originally the mother of the petitioner is the absolute owner and possessor of agricultural land to an extent of Ac. 1O_OO guntas in Survey No.548/32 /5. situated at Usirikayalapally Village, Karepalli, Khammam District. It is stated that out of love ald affection towards the petitioner, her rnother executed a RegiStered Gift Deed in the year 2O2I gifting the subject property in favour of the petitioner. Since then the petitioner

¶35

¶36

¶37

is in continuous possession and enjoyment over the subject property and she was also issued pattadar passbook and title deed of the said property. It is further case of the petitioner that when respondent Nos.6 to 11 are interfering with her peaceful possession ald enjoyment over the subject property and causing inconvenience, she approached the Sub-Divisional Magistrate & Special Assistant Agent to Government, Mobile Court, Bhadradri District by instituting a suit in O.S.No. t42 of 2023 and the said Court has granted police protection uide order, dated 21.08.2023. Thereafter, when the respondent Nos.6 to 11 illegally trespassed into her land ald abused her, she lodged a complaipt dated 03.1O.2023 on the file of respondent No.5.

¶38

The grievance of the petitioner is that though the complaint dated 03.10.2023 submitted by her discloses commission of cog:nizable offence, respondent No.5 is not taking any action on the said complaint.

¶39

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, would submit that acting on the complaint, dated 03.10.2023, respondent No.S registered a case in Crime No.216 of 2023 for the offences punishable under

¶40

¶41

¶42

Section 294 (b) rpC and Section 3 (i) (v), 3(x) and 3(xv) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 ald took up investigation. 6. In view of the above submissions, as the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed, the Writ Petition is closed as no further orders are necessary.

¶43

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. No order as to costs.

¶44

SD/- MOHD. SANAULLAH^ANSARI ASSISTAN GIS RAR ,TRUE COPY//

¶45

SECTTON OFFICER

¶46

To, '1 . Two CCs to GP FORHOME,HighCourtfortheStateof^{Telangana, at} Hvderabad [OUT] 2 ijir;-cdi; Snr. dr.rcoruu^{NEHRU,Advocate} toPUCI 3. Two CD CoPies BM GJP

I I I

HIGH COURT

DATED:0210112024

ORDER

WP.No.34129 ot 2023

*
n:(-i o
ljJ
,
tJ
a.?
o r
i
3 I

¶54

CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUTCOSTS

¶55

6
*
4

Banothu Lakshmi v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Banothu Lakshmi 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

Smt. S.K.G. Parvathi Vs The State of Telangana

J. Kalyan Kumar Vs Smt. J. Gayathri

Mekala Shashanka Vs The State of Telangana

Toddy Tappers Cooperative Society (Tics) Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Vorem Bharathi Vs The State of Telangana

Satu Narasimha Vs The State of Telangana