Telangana High Court
WP/37850/2014 of Akula Srimannarayana Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary on 30 December 2014
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE THIRTEITH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No. 37850 of 2014 BETWEEN Akula
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABADFOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE THIRTEITH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
WRIT PETITION No. 37850 of 2014
BETWEEN
Akula Srimannarayana and another
AND
... PETITIONERS
The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Department ofHome), A.P. Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS
The Court 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.
ORDER:
Heard.
2. Present writ petition is filed by two petitioners, who claim thatrespondent Nos.2 and 3 are pressurizing and harassing them withoutfollowing due process of law.
3. Instructions received by the learned government pleader would showthat petitioners’ second son got married to Venkata Narayana Subhashini.However, there were some matrimonial disputes, which lead to the wife filingthe complaint and registration of F.I.R. viz., crime No.3 of 2009 underSections 498A, 323, 384, 312, 596 r/w 34, 109 IPC read with Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and the said case, after investigation, wasnumbered as C.C.No.29 of 2010 in which the accused were arrested andproduced before II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhimavaram,West Godavari District and the case was transferred to Principal Junior CivilJudge, Bhimavaram, and re-numbered as C.C.No.3 of 2013, which ispending.
It is stated that the husband of the complainant was released on bail oncondition of depositing his passport in the criminal court and thereupon, hesought permission for release of the passport to enable him to go to USA forhis job for a period of one year. The said permission was granted for oneyear, but the accused has not returned. The court below is stated to haveissued non-bailable warrants on 20.05.2013 and 11.06.2013 and forexecuting warrants respondent Nos.2 and 3 have visited petitioners’ houseto know the whereabouts of their sons and except making enquiries with thepetitioners, the respondent-police neither called the petitioners to the policestation nor harassed them, as alleged.
4. Since the instructions specifically show that respondent Nos.2 and 3only enquired with the petitioners about the details of their sons and that theyhave not harassed or interfered with the life of the petitioners, it cannot besaid that respondent Nos.2 and 3 have harassed them. However, ifrespondent Nos.2 and 3 require any further information or need to recordstatement of petitioner Nos.1 and 2, they are at liberty to give themappropriate notice under the Code of Criminal Procedure, record theirstatements and then proceed with the matter in accordance with law.
Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. As a sequel, themiscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be noorder as to costs.
_____________________
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J