Telangana High Court
WP/22534/2004 of K.Srinivas Rao Vs The Station House Officer on 27 December 2004
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 22534 of 2004 Between: K.Srinivas Rao S/o.Kishan Rao, aged 30 years,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO : 22534 of 2004
Between:
K.Srinivas Rao S/o.Kishan Rao, aged 30 years,Occu:Contractor, Durshed Village Karimnagar (M)&Dist.
AND
... PETITIONER
1 The Station House Officer, Karimnagar Rural Police Station.
2 M.Chandi Rani W/o.K.Srinivas,
Dureshed Village, Karimnagar Dist.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased toissue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus orany other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondent No.1 in not takingany action as per Law and not arresting the respondent No.2 even though FIR inCrime No.336 of 2004 dt 6-8-2004 registered for offence punishable undersection.166 of IPC, is arbitrary, illegal, null and void and consequently direct therespondent no.1 to take necessary action against the respondent no.2, againstwhom FIR in Crime No.336/2004 dt 6-8-2004 is registered for an offence punishableunder section.166 of IPC.
Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.K.VENUMADHAV
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR HOME
The Court at the admission stage made the following :
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.
O R D E R:
The grievance of the petitioner is that the first respondent has not taken any actionagainst the second respondent, though FIR in Crime No.336/2004 has beenregistered, for an offence punishable under Section 166 of IPC. The petitioner filed acomplaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., before the Additional Judicial Magistrate ofFirst Class, Karimnagar, against the second respondent, with certain allegations.The learned Magistrate referred the matter to the first respondent, under Section156(3) of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the second respondent submitted a report to the trialCourt, stating that no case is made out against the second respondent. The firstrespondent filed a counter affidavit stating in detail the various steps taken by him,on receiving a reference from the trial Court, as well as the result of his investigation.
Once, the matter has been investigated by the police under Section 156(3) ofCr.P.C., and a report is submitted to the Court, which referred the matter, it is for theconcerned Court to take stock of the matter. If the complainant is aggrieved by thereport submitted by the police, he can certainly file a protest petition. This Courtcannot interfere with the matter, at this stage, that too under Article 226 of theConstitution of India.
Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to work out hisremedies, in accordance with the relevant provisions of Criminal Procedure Code,before the appropriate Court. There shall be no order as to costs.
Note:Issue copy in three days.
(B/o)
pan
To
1 The Station House Officer,
Karimnagar Rural Police Station, Karimnagar.
2 Two C.Cs to the Govt.Pleader for Home, High Court building, Hyderabad (OUT).
3 Two C.D.copies.
_________________
27[th] December, 2004