Narayan Das Dalia v. Station House Officer, Inthezargunj P.S., Warangal
Case at a glance
- Bench
- PRINCIPAL DISTRICT, PRINCIPAL, DISTRICT
Outcome
Dismissed
In view of the above submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 151
Judgment
Cause title
Narayan Das Dalia, S/o. Ramnivas Dalia, aged 59 yrs, H.No. 8-4-49, Srikrishan Colony, Warangal. ...PETITIONER
AND 1 The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secreteriat, Hyderabad
2. Station House Officer, Inthezargunj P.S., Warangal., - 3. The Court of the Principal District Judege, Warangal, - 4. Sri Suresh Kumar Dalia, S/o late Ramnivas Dalia, aged 46 years, Occ Business, H.No."l 1-29-270/'1, 2nd Bank Colony, Raod No.3, M.V.Colony, Warangal.
5. Sri Santhosh Kumar Dalia, S/o late Ramnivas Dalia, aged 4{l years, Occ Business, Ri/o H.No.1 1-29-99/1, M.V.Colony, Deshipet Road, Warangal. 6. Smt. Neelam Dalia, Wo. Suresh Kumar Dalia, aged about 41 years, Occ Housewife, R/o. H.No.1 1-29-27011, Road No.3, M.V.Colony, Warangal. ...RESPONOENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to lssue Writ, Order or Direction one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS directing the 3rd Respondent not to disburse the amount of Rs.1,97,00,3981 deposited by the 6th Respondent to the credit of OP No.538 of 201 3 on the file of Principal District Judge, Warangal pending hearing of the Criminal MP No.913 ot 2014 in Crime No.336 of 2013 and Crl.MP No.9l7 ot 2014 in Crime No.337 of 201 3 on the file of the 1 st Addl. Judicial I Class Magistrate, Warangal against the 4th and sth RespondenO under Sec.403,406,409,418,42O rlw 34 lPC, Warangal. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMP. NO: 31 588 oF 2014) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased direct the 3rd Respondent not to disburse the amount of Rs.',l,97,00,398/- deposited by the 6th Respondent to the credit of OP No.538 of 2O'13 on the file of Principal District Judge, Warangal, pending hearing of the Criminal MP No.913 of 2O14 in Crime No.336 of 2013 and Crl.MP No.917 of 2O14in Crime No.337 of 2013 on the file of the 1st Addl. Judicial I Class Magistrate, Warangal against the 4th and Sth Respondent under Sec.403,406,409,418,42O rlw 34lPC, Warangal. Counsel for the Petitioner :SRl G.R.MERCY \flJAYdrep.,SRl P.B.VIJAY KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents No.1&2 : SRI R.LAXMIKANTH REDDY,AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondents No,3to6: -- The Court made the folloi/ing: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VAISTI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.25243 of 2014
ORDER:
Heard Ms. G.R.Mercy Vliaya, learned counsel representing Sri P.B.Vijay Kumar, learned counsel on record appearing for ttre petitioner and Sri R.t^axmikanth Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.l to 2.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the cause in the present Writ Petition does not survive for adjudication.
Operative part
3. In view of the above submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. SD/. S. MALLTKARJUNA RAO -_. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I l //TRUE COPY// SE CTION OFFICER To,
One CC to SRI P.B VIJAY KUMAR Advocate [OPUC]
Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana [OUT]
Two CD CoPies. \ BSK BM (f HIGH COURT DATED:1010912025 \ ORDER WP.No.25243 of 2014 J (-- oo 10 riB ?0?t * EspN(i: DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS G) 4d tu: 1) "lv\
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the above submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 151.
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.