Smt. Malyala Sujatha v. The State Of Telangana,
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA: AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY ,THE SIXTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO: 't5809 OF 2016 Between:
Smt. Malyala Sujatha, w/o Malyala Sadanandam, aged about 34 years, occ: Housewife & Kirana Business, R/o.6083/4, Sai Nagar, Narsampet, Warangal District.
...PETITIONER AND
1. The State of Telangana,, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.
2. The Executive Magistrate and Tahsildar, Narsampet Mandal, Warangal District.
3. The Station Hosue Officer,, Narsampet Proh. and Excise Station, Warangal District.
...RESPONDENTS 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 parttcularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the 2nd respondent in .
I { issuing the Warrant in M.C. No. 13412016 dl. 22-4-20'16 directing to 3rd respondent to take the husband of the petitioner viz., Malyala Sadanandam into custody alleging breach of conditions of bond executed on 5-12-2015 and non-payment of the security amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- and to send him to prison until such bond period expires is highly arbitrary, bad and illegal. WPMP. NO: 19541 OF 2016 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 pass orders directing the 2nd respondent to issue orders for release of the husband of the petitioner viz., Malyala Sadanandam who is presently lodged in Central Prison,
Warangal, by suspending the Warrant issued by the 2nd respondent in tt/.C No' 134t2016 dl 22-4-2016, pending disposal of the main Writ Petition. i d Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BABUJI TENNETI Counsel for Respondent No.1: GP FOR HOME Counsel for Respondent No.2: GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for Respondent No.3: GP FOR PROHIBITION & EXCISE The Court made the following: ORDER l t
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR Writ Petition No.158 09 of 2016 ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing the warrant in M.C.No.134 of 2016 dt.22.04.2016 directing the 3'd respondent to take the husband of the petitioner, namely Malyala Sadanandam, into custody, alleging breach of conditions of bond executed on 05'12'2015 and non-payment of security amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and to send him to prison until such bond period expires, as highly arbitrary, bad and illegal and with consequential relief'
2.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleaders appearing for the respondents. 3.
This Court, by interim order, dt.29.04'2016, passed in W.P.M.P.No.19541 of 2016, directed release of the petitioner's husband, pending disposal of the writ petition. Thus, the husband of the petitioner, who is said to have committed breach oF bond, is a free citizen today.
4.
Insofar as challenge to the impugned proceeding is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the issue is
no longer res integr4 in view of the order of this Court in W.p.No.9363 of 2016, dt.21.03.2016, wherein, this Court had held as under: "The impugned notice reflects that after being bound over, the said Mateti Raju was implicated in COR No.5712016 in relation to an offence under Section 7(A) rad with Section g(e) of the A.p. Prohibition Act, 1995. Owing to his alleged involvement in t he said offence, the second respondent concluded that he committed breach of the bond furnished by him under Section 110 Cr.p.C. This Court is of the opinion that mere arraignment in an offence cannot be taken to be a conviction whereby it could be said that the accused had committed a breach of the bond furnished by him for maintaining good behaviour.
Thus, on this count, the impugned notice dated 27 .02.20t6 is unsustainable and is therefore set aside. As a consequence, the detention of Mateti Raju owing to the failure to pay the amount of penalty would also be rendered illegal.,, 5.
By the above said order, this Court observed that the invocation of bond without issuing a notice or without mentioning the alleged breach committed by the executant of the bond cannot be sustained and that the respondent authorlties cannot seek to enforce such bond. 6.
In the Facts oF the present case also, the respondents did not put the husband of the petitioner, who is the executant of the bond, of which, the alleged breach committed by him warranting action, on
notice. On the other hand, the 2nd respondent has straight away proceeded to issue the impugned proceeding along with Form 16, whereby the husband of the petitioner was detained and sent for judicial custody.
7.
In view of the order oF this Court passed in W.p.No.9363 of 2016 dt.21.03.2016, holding that the notice of breach of bond is required to be given, and for the reasons alike as were stated therein, the impugned proceeding issued by the 2nd respondent cannot be sustained and the same is liable to be set aside. B.
Accordingly, the Writ petition is allowed and the impugned warrant in M;C.No.134 of 20t6 dt.22.04.20|6, issued by the 2nd respondent, is set aside.
9.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. No order as to costs.
SD/.MOHD.SANAULLAH AN ARI ASSISTANT REGI RAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION FICER / To, The Principal Secretary, Home Department, State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad.
The Executive Magistrate and Tahsildar, Narsampet Mandal, Warangal District.
The Station Hosue Officer, Narsampet Proh. and Excise Stbtion, Warangal District.
Two CCs to the GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana [OUT] Two CCs to the GP for Revenue, High Court for the State of Telangana [OUT] Two CCs to the GP for Prohibition {Excise, High Court for the State of Telangana [OUT] One CC to SRI BABUJI TENNETI, Advocate [OPUC] Two C.D. Copies.
One Spare Copy.
I z j .i 7.
B.
o MRC BS W
HIGH COURT DATED:06/09/2022 ( t q oo 2[ $ts Nil .+ 1A Eai I) t Nzv
ORDER
WP.No.'15809 of 2016 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \I *t/