High Court for State of TelanganaWP/20522/2006dismissed as infructuous

Kunchala Sarojini v. Station House Officer,Railway Police Station, Ongole

2016-08-08P Naveen Rao3 pages

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.20522 of 2006 DATED : 08.08.2016 Between:

Kunchala Sarojini W/o.Thalathoti Lakshmaiah, Aged about 36 yrs, R/o.D.No.20-7-60, Lambadi Donka, Ongole, Prakasam District.

.. Petitioner AND Station House Officer, Railway police station, Ongole & others.

.. Respondents The Court made the following:

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION No.20522 of 2006 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed praying to grant the following relief : "to declare the inaction of the respondents 1 to 3 in not taking expeditious and effective steps to investigate the Cr.No.38 of 2006 on the file of the first respondent police station pertaining to the homicidal death of the petitioner's son is arbitrary and unlawful dereliction of duty, and further direct the respondents to ensure efficient and expeditious completion of the said investigation, by having it done by the Crime Branch of the Criminal Investigation Department (CB CID) if necessary."

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Home.

3. Learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submit that though originally crime was registered in Railway Police Station, Ongole, later it was transferred to II Town Police Station, Ongole and new crime number was assigned as Cr.No.91 of 2006. Initially police filed final report on 09.07.2008 as "Action dropped". However, Government referred the matter to CID for further investigation vide order issued in G.O.No.69 dated 07.01.2009. Accordingly, CID investigated and filed their final report on 20.11.2010 as "Action dropped". She further submits that by order dated 18.02.2015, II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole in P.R.C.No.4 of 2015 committed the case to the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ongole, and the same is pending.

4. The narration of events disclose that action is taken in pursuant to Crime No.38 of 2006 and therefore it cannot be said that there was inaction on the part of respondents 1 to 3.

5. In view of the subsequent developments as stated by the learned Government pleader no cause in the writ petition survives for adjudication.

6. Writ petition is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition, shall stand closed.

__________________ P.NAVEEN RAO,J

8th August, 2016 Rds