Kukatpally, Ranga Reddy District v. District
Case at a glance
Outcome
Withdrawn
In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India arts. 19, 21, 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. The Superintendent of Police, Medak, at Sangareddy, Medak District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or…
Judgment
Sudhakar M.Mario @ Sudhakar Babu, S/o late Sri Shankarudu, 33 years, Occ. Key Board Player and Sound Designer, R/o KPHB Colony, Kukatpally, Ranga Reddy District. ...PETITIONER AND
Miss Sonia Mathew, D/o.Sri K.Mathew, 23 years, Occ. Employee.
K.Mathew, 50 years.
Smt. Lelamma, W/o.Sri K.Mathew, 45 years. All are R/o.298 MIG, BHEL, R.C.Puram, Medak District-032.
The Station House Officer, Ramachandrapuram Police Station, Medak District.
Operative part
The Superintendent of Police, Medak, at Sangareddy, Medak District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Habeas Corpus directing the 2 to 4 respondents to produce the 1st respondent before this Hon'ble Court as the 1st respondent has been illegally detained by the respondents No.2 and 3 herein, which is in contrary to Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and pass such other order or orders, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity, else the petitioner would be put to irreparable loss and hardship. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.POTTIGARI SRIDHAR REDDY Counsel for the Respondents: THE ADVOCATE GENERAL The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B.PRAKASH RAO And THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.23319 of 2007 ORDER: (Per the Hon’ble Mr Justice B.Prakash Rao) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he filed a letter dated 22.11.2007 to the effect that the petitioner has addressed a letter showing his willingness to withdraw the Writ Petition itself. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. _________________ (B.PRAKASH RAO, J) _____________________ (L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J) 28th February 2008 RRB
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — arts. 19, 21, 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 28 Feb 2008. The bench was B PRAKASH RAO, L NARASIMHA REDDY.
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.