High CourtsSingle Bench(2023) 10 AP CK 0019

Sankati Ramadevi & Others vs State & Others

Andhra Pradesh High Court · Decided on 27 October 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 28410 Of 2023

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 459 words

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa, J

1.

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

“….to issue a Writ or Order or a direction more particularly in a nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent Nos.1 to 3 in illegally interfering with life and liberty of petitioners by harassing and insisting them to produce Sankathi Srinivasareddy, who is husband of the 1st petitioner and father of the 2nd petitioner and demanding them to attend to Gurazala Police Station frequently and threatening to detain them in their custody, without there being any case registered against them, unless they produce the said Sankathi Srinivasareddy in connection with a case in which he was falsely implicated due to political enmity, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently restrain the respondents from interfering with life and liberty of petitioners and pass such other order or orders…..”.

2.

Heard Sri Venkateswarlu Kolla, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Nirmal Kumar Yadav, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents.

3.

With the consent of learned counsel representing both the parties, the Writ Petition is disposed of at the stage of admission itself.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the husband of the 1st petitioner by name Sankathi Srinivasareddy was falsely implicated in murder case. The petitioners who are the wife and younger son of Sankathi Srinivasareddy are nothing to do with the offences and they are not the accused. But, the police are harassing them by calling them to Gurazala Police Station frequently and threatening them to take them into custody and they need protection from the said harassment.

5.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that the husband and elder son of the 1st petitioner are the accused in Cr.No.165 of 2023 of Gurazala Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302, 506 r/w 149 IPC, which was registered on 24.10.2023. Since then, the accused are absconding. The police might have gone to their house searching the accused and they never harassed the petitioners.

6.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel representing both parties, the respondents are hereby directed not to call the petitioners to the police station relating to Cr.No.165 of 2023 of Gurazala Town Police Station and the police are at liberty to proceed with the investigation as per law, without causing any inconvenience to the petitioners, who are not the accused relating to the said crime.

7.

With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.