Vadlamani Venkata Naga Surya Narayana Murthi, v. The State Of Telangana,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD

FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND FIFTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION Nos.7480, 7487, AND 8445 of 2015 BETWEEN Vadlamani Venkata Naga Surya Narayana Murthi and others ... PETITIONERS AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Department of Home), Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.

...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:

COMMON ORDER:

Heard.

2. These three writ petitions are filed by the same petitioner and the common grievance of the petitioner in these writ petitions is that respondent No.3-police has been harassing him, detaining him for hours together in the police station, and threatening him in filthy language though he is not an accused in crime Nos.36, 37 and 38 of 2015 registered with Kalvakurthy Police Station.

3. Learned Government Pleader has received instructions, which state that three separate complaints of cheating against accused Nos.1 and 2 were received, based on which the aforesaid three separate crimes were registered against A1 and A2. It is stated that during investigation and after recording statements of witnesses, it was found that petitioner was issued a cheque in the name of A1 and collected money from A1 and A2 and points out the involvement of petitioner in all the said crimes and hence, he is impleaded as A3 in the crime and the investigation is still stated to be pending. However, though A1 and A2 were arrested and sent to judicial custody, no action could be taken against the petitioner as he is stated to be not available and absconding. It is also stated that since the petitioner is not available, the question of detaining him or threatening him in filthy language etc., as alleged by the petitioner is denied.

4. Evidently, since the petitioner is stated to be absconding, the allegation of the petitioner that he has been detained in the police station and threatened etc., cannot be accepted. Since that is the only basis of these writ petitions, no relief as sought for can be granted. Respondent No.3 shall, therefore, take appropriate steps, in accordance with law, and proceed further with the investigation and complete the same expeditiously. Writ petitions are, accordingly, disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________

VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J March 30, 2015 LMV