Petitioners sought withdrawal of a writ petition filed under Article 226 challenging the conclusion of an investigation. The High Court granted permission to withdraw and dismissed the petition as withdrawn.
Permission to withdraw the writ petition was granted. The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[3183 ]
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO:9872 OF 2024
Between:
.....PETITIONERS
AND
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition Under Artic|e 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 a Writ, Order, or Direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the aclion of the respondent no 4 in not concluding the investigation in crime no 30712023 on the file of the respondent no 4 on the basis of the available active CCTV camera recordings in full length coverage, previous and subsequent recordings to the alleged scene of offence
/
said to be committed on r 9-06-2023 at about 1g-00 hrs avairabre in the form of Pen drive attached to the representation of the petitioner no 2 dated 12-oz -2023 duly foruvarded by the respondent no 2 to respondent no 4 specificafly on .r g-062023 righl from 5. 0o pm to 07. 00 pm, to arrive to the concrusion of the visuars of the victim girl being dragged to the catfle shed from the road by the Accused no 1 /petitioner no 1 at about 1g. 00 hrs on 19-06-2023 and subsequenfly the presence of the LWl /comprainanuRespondent no 5 arong with the victim girr present in the house of the accused no 2 in the above crime on 20{6-2023 right from 07. 00 pm to 09. 00 pm to bargain justice and further the presence of the active ccrv recordings present in the alleged scene of offence out of which the presence of the l.o during the time of attending the scene of offence on 2,1-07 -2023 at about 04. 00 pm to 05.00 pm remains the crucial and technical evidence to be considered by the respondent no 4 to bring out the truth of falsehood of the incident being aleged to have committed and farsLry impricated the petitioner no 1 and his elder brother as accused no 1 and 2 in the crime no 307 /2o23 on the file of the Respondent no 4 contrary to fair investigation and arso against the sections 29 and 30 0f the pocso Act and also ilegar arbitrary and viorative of the principles of natural justice and against the article 20 and 21 of the constitution of rndia and consequen y direct the respondent no 4 to concrude the investigation in crime 3o7 12023 onry after fu rength consideration of the ccrV footage coverage activery recorded on 19-06-2023 at 05-00 pm to 07. o0 pm as to the presence of the victim girr being dragged to the catfle shed from the road and on 20-06-2023 at about 07. 00 pm to 09. 00 pm as to the presence of the comprainant arong with the victim girr to bargain justice and on 21-06-2023 ar about 04 00 to 05. 00 pm about the presence of r.o at the aleged scene of offence clearly establishes the working conditions of CCTV coverage.
Counsel for thepetitioners : Ms. p.LALITHA KAMESH
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.l to 4 : AGp FOR HOME
Counsel for the Respondent No.5 : -
The Court made the following ORDER
t
1
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.9872 OF 2024
ORDER:
Ms. P. Lalitha Kamesh, learned counsel for the petitioners, addressed a lefter dated 16.10.2024 to the Registry seeking
permission of this Court to withdraw the writ petition.
Permission is accorded and, accordingly, the writ petition is
dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs.,
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending
in this writ petition stand closed.
SDI.L. VIJ A LAXMI GISTRAB ASSISTANT
//TRUECOPY/,
S ON OFFICER
To r^ np troR HoME,High court for the State of Telangana at : Hll"lf ?S i?'.liou'n o KAM ES H'Ad vocateto P u cl
a i;;cD coPies sA (k GJP
HIGH COURT
DATED:17 11012024
ORDER
WP.No.9872 of 2024
-t
o i-1 l4
4:
(,
(J
2t t:t iw i
*
.oc.,,-.,-^ +
t{.
DISMISSING THE W.P
AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS. Ya-
4 l2/ lrr o
Kottapally Ravi @ RaviMer
Kottapally Saroja
The State of Telangana
Director General of Police
Commissioner of Police, Nizamabad
Shaik Shamsher
B. Vijaysen Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
