← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/5873/2012dismissed no costs

N.Srinivasulu v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep.By Its Principal Secretary

2015-07-29Sanjay Kumar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH * * * * WRIT PETITION No.5873 OF 2012 Between:

N. Srinivasulu .. Petitioner And The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Hyderabad, and others.

.. Respondents DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 29-07-2015 SUBMITTED FOR APPROVAL:

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR

1. Whether Reporters of Local newspapers Yes/No may be allowed to see the Judgment?

2. Whether the copies of judgment may be Yes/No marked to Law Reporters/Journals

3. Whether Their Lordship wish to see the fair copy of the Judgment? Yes/No THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.5873 of 2012 ORDER:

The grievance of the petitioner was that the police authorities were not taking steps to register a case against respondents 7 to 11 pursuant to the reports dated 24.01.2012 and 07.02.2012.

Relying on the written instructions dated 20.07.2015 received from the SubInspector of Police, Tirupathi East Police Station, Urban Police District, Tirupathi, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home informed this Court that the petitioner submitted representations dated 24.01.2012 and 06.02.2012 to the Superintendent of Police, Urban Police District, Tirupathi, against respondents 10 and 11. Thereupon, Crime No.45 of 2012 was registered under Sections 41(a) and 102 Cr.P.C. on the file of Tirupathi East Police Station. Subsequently, the provision of law was altered to Sections 177, 182, 384, 420 and 506 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. Upon completion of investigation, the police authorities laid a charge sheet vide C.C.No.364 of 2012 before the learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupathi, and the case was stated to be pending trial.

In the light of the afore-stated facts, the allegation of the petitioner as to the purported inaction on the part of the police in taking steps upon his complaints is shown to be without basis.

The writ petition is therefore devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand dismissed. No order as to costs.

____________________ JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR 29th July, 2015 IBL