Andhra Pradesh High Court
WP/30906/2024 of SAKILA LAKSHMI Vs THE STATE OF AP on 31 December 2024
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY , THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 30906/2024 Between: Sakila Lakshmi ...PETITIONER AND The State Of
APHC010591142024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY ,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPAWRIT PETITION NO: 30906/2024
Between:
Sakila Lakshmi ...PETITIONER
AND
The State Of Ap and Others
...RESPONDENT(S)
Counsel for the Petitioner:
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.
1. RAMESH N
Counsel for the Respondent(S):
1. GP FOR HOME
The Court made the following ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for:
“….to issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd respondents in issuing 41-A notice to the petitioner in connecting with FIR No.23/2024 dated 01.02.2024 on the file of the Chinnaganjam Police Station is illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principle of the natural justice and violative of the Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the 41-A notice in connection with FIR No.23/2024 dated 01.02.2024….”
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents.
3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader on written instructions would submit that the Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.23 of 2024 dated 01.02.2024. For ready reference, the relevant portion of the written instructions is extracted below:
“…It is submitted that, based on the confession statement of accused A-1, the 5[th] respondent added the names of A-3 Anil, A-4 Nagaraju, A-5 Kolla Venkatarao, A-6 Sakila Chandrasekara Reddy and A-7/petitioner Sakala Lakshmi as accused in this case and a memo was filed in the Hon’ble court.
The accused A-6 who is husband of the petitioner had also filed a writ petition WP.No.27859/202 in the Hon’ble High Court of AP and the Hon’ble court issued order that to follow the procedure as contemplated under section 35(3) of BNSS.
It is further submitted that the 3[rd] respondent police has not taken any signatures on empty papers and taken the signatures of A-6 on his confession statement and 41-A Cr.P.C notice only in the presence of mediators. The 3[rd]respondent never threatened the petitioner and his husband with dire consequences.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that recording the same, the petition may be disposed of.
5. In the light of the instructions extracted supra, the petition is disposed of. No costs.
Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________________
Dr. VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA
W.P.No.30906 of 2024Dated.31.12.2024
JLV