Dhuli Ganga Raju v. The Superintendent of Police, Kakinada, East Godavari District & 4 others
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 s. 324
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 159
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. 13th March, 2007 Tsy __________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J
Judgment
Order
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents.
#2. Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 1 to 4 in not taking any action on the complaint the petitioner, dated 22-02-2006, submitted the 1st respondent, as illegal, and arbitrary, and consequently direct for investigation of the said complaint by any Investigating Officer other than the 4th respondent, and book a criminal case and take appropriate action against the 5th respondent.
#3. Petitioner made a representation, dated 22-02-2006, before the 1st respondent-Superintendent of Police making certain allegations against the 5th respondent and also with regard to the illegal closure of the earlier crime. In that regard, the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents obtained instructions and submitted that the case registered on a private complaint of the petitioner on 13-12-2005 was investigated and the same was referred as ‘false’ on 31-01-2006. It is further stated that certain disputes are pending before the civil Court between the petitioner and the 5th respondent and cases against Dhuli Satyanarayana, son of the petitioner herein, and the 5th respondent were also pending in Cr.Nos.561 of 2005 and 562 of 2005 for the offence punishable under Section 324 IPC and after investigation charge sheets were also filed which were numbered as C.C.Nos.225 & 226/06 respectively. Insofar as referring the earlier complaint of the petitioner as false, it is always open for the petitioner either to file a protest application or to seek appropriate action under Section 159 Cr.P.C. Therefore, I am of the opinion that without taking recourse under the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and without filing a protest application, the question of directing the other Investigating Officer to conduct investigation does not arise.
#4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. 13th March, 2007 Tsy __________________ V.ESWARAIAH, J
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — s. 324; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 159.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 13 Mar 2007. The bench was V ESWARAIAH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.