Telangana High Court
WP/32697/2010 of K.Rami Reddy Vs M.Mahesh on 31 December 2010
SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.32697 of 2010 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.1 in not investigating into Crime No.259 of 2010 on the file of P.S.Shamirpet, Cyberabad, as illegal and arbitrary. Petitioner lodged a
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.32697of2010
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring theaction of respondent No.1 in not investigating into Crime No.259 of2010 on the file of P.S.Shamirpet, Cyberabad, as illegal and arbitrary.
Petitioner lodged a complaint on 29.11.2010 with the secondrespondent - Station House Officer, Shamirpet Police Station, statingthat on 15.11.2010, one Chandupatla Pocham Reddy, seventhrespondent herein, and his son trespassed into the land admeasuringAc.1.05 guntas covered by Survey Nos.60 and 61 situated atJaganguda Village, Shamirpet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Basedon the said complaint, a case was registered in Crime No.259 of 2010.It is the grievance of the petitioner that investigation is not being madeby respondents 1 to 6.
On written instructions, it is submitted by the learned AssistantGovernment Pleader for Home appearing for respondents 1 to 6 thaton the complaint of the petitioner, crime was registered, complainantwas examined as L.W.1 and scene of offence was visited. It is furthersubmitted that the petitioner is not able to identify the exact boundarylines of the land in question, as such, he was issued notice underSection 91/160 Cr.P.C. to produce the witnesses to show the exactscene of offence for the purpose of investigation but the petitioner hasnot produced any witness for the same. It is further submitted that theTahsildar, Shamirpet Mandal, was addressed on 09.12.2010 and28.12.2010 to furnish ownership particulars with regard to aforesaidland. It is also submitted that after completion of investigation, necessary report would be filed.
In view of the steps taken by respondents 1 to 6 as referred toabove, it cannot be said that no action is taken on the complaint of thepetitioner. In view of pendency of investigation, I deem it appropriate todirect respondents 1 to 6 to complete investigation and file appropriatefinal report before the Magistrate concerned, as expeditiously aspossible.
Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of.No order as to costs.
_______________________
R.SUBHASH REDDY, J
31[st] DECEMBER, 2010.kvni