Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(1)ALT754
ORDERGoda Raghuram, J.Competing interpretations of recurrent-contemporaneous events:1. Since the inception of the naxalite movement in Andhra Pradesh in 1969, 551 police personnel were killed including one DIG, two S.Ps, five D.S.Ps; 16 Inspectors and 49 Sub-Inspectors. 2928 civilians were killed; public and private property worth hundred of crores of rupees was destroyed; the extremist groups indulged in mindless violence and committed brutal murders. The naxal violence increased since 1991. They deliberately ambush and attack police with sophisticated firearms and explosives. In order to create terror the Maoists are also targeting functionaries of ruling political parties and killing them brutally - (counter affidavit of the Director General of Police in W.P. No. 15419/06 including Annexures 2 and 7)2. The State Executive for the first time started extra-legal killing which is popularly known as Encounter since 1968 and as on today in the name of alleged encounter the State has snat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1997(2)ALD(Cri)252; 1998(1)ALT(Cri)15; 1998CriLJ46
ORDER1. The petitioner, the father of his deceased second son - G. Satish, a ninth class student of Sri Krishnaveni Residential School, Poranki, Vijayawada, and who was found to be dead on 24-2-1997 within the premises of the Residential School, has a serious grievance that it is a case of murder, where the concerned police people who are investigating the matter and the authorities of the residential school are projecting it as a case of suicide by hanging. Therefore, he is seeking a direction from this Court to the respondents 1 to 6 who are (1) The Director General of Police, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, (2) The Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada, (3) The Dy. Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada, (4) The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada, (5) Circle Inspector of Police, Gannavaram, Krishna district and (6) Sub-Inspector of Police, Penamaluru Police Station, Krishna district to register the F.I.R. under section 302 read with S. 34 I.P.C., 120A and 120B, I.P.C. and for a direct...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 1975CriLJ144
B. Raju, J.1. (D/- 18-4-1974). This is an application by the State of Andhra Pradesh for revision of the decision of the Sessions Judge, Kurnool in Cri. A. No. 170 of 1970 acting under the powers conferred upon him under Section 6C of the Essential Commodities Act 10 of 19-55. In Section 2A of the Essential Commodities -Act heads of commodities which come within the meaning of 'essential commodity' are listed among which are included foodstuffs. For maintaining or increasing supplies of any essential commodity or for securing their equitable distribution and availability at fair prices, provision is made under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act to make orders for regulating or prohibiting the production, supply and distribution thereof and trade and commerce therein. Under this provision several orders were made from time to time either by the Central Government or by the State Governments under delegation of powers. With regard to foodgrains, edible oilseeds and edible oils, p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1961AP18
ORDERSanjeeva Row Nayudu, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order of the Additional District Munsif Magistrate, Kakinada, made in C. C. No. 297 of 1956 rejecting the preliminary objection taken by the petitioner before him as to the maintainability of the prosecution in that case. 2. The facts out of which this revision petition has arisen may be briefly stated; The petitioner was a member of the Panchayat Board, Yeleswaram in East Godavari District. He was appointed as temporary President for the purpose of conducting a meeting of the Panchayat Board in order to effect the co-option of a woman member to the Panchayat Board. This meeting was conducted on 11-7-1956. At that meeting one Nookamma was co-opted as the woman member. The respondent in this revision petition filed a Writ Petition in the High Court against the co-option, which was dismissed on the ground that an alternative remedy by way of an election petition lay. Later the respondent filed an election petit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1959AP428; 1959CriLJ958
ORDERMunikannaiah, J. 1. The petitioner herein is a Revenue Inspector in Madak District. In Criminal Case No. 26/2 of 1957 pending before the Munsif-Magistrate's Court, Vikarabad, against another person for an offence under Section 447 of the Indian Penal Code, the prosecution took out summons to the petitioner to figure as a witness. The summons was sent through a constable for service on the petitioner. That constable went to Sangareddy and found the petitioner engaged with the Tahsildar as he was Helping the latter in his official work. The petitioner did not immediately come out and attend to the police constable and accept the service of summons, but wanted the police constable to wait as ho was busy assisting his boss. The constable left the place and reported that the petitioner refused to receive the summons. On this the Munsif-Magistrate, Vikarabad. instituted proceedings under Section 485A of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the petitioner and convicted him of the offen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2000(1)ALD(Cri)590; [2000]100CompCas729(AP)
ORDERJ. Chelameswar, J.1. This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.24 of 1999 on the file of the Court of the Special Judge for Economic Offences at Hyderabad. The petitioners are the accused Nos.1 and 2 in the said C.C., which came to be filed by way of private complaint by the first respondent herein alleging the commission of offences under Sections 60, 63, 68, 68A read with Section 621 of the Companies Act. The first respondent is a share-holder in a company called M/s. SPECTRUM POWER GENERATION LIMITED, Hyderabad which has its registered office at Hyderabad. The petitioners herein are the directors of the said company.2. The allegations of the complaint are that the petitioners floated a Company in United States of America (U.S.A.) - M/s. SPECTRUM TECHNOLOGIES USA INC at New York. In the said company, both the petitioners own 5000 of the shares each. The accused also floated an offshore company called S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2006(6)ALD500; 2006(6)ALT771
Ramesh Ranganathan, J. 1. Aggrieved by the interlocutory order of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, in O.A. No. 2414 of 2006 dated 27.4.2006, whereby the petitioner was directed not to dismiss the 1st respondent-applicant from service, on the basis of the judgment of the Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Vijayawada, in C.C. No. 40 of 2000 dated 4.3.2006, pending further orders, the present writ petition is filed by the Municipal Corporation of Guntur.2. Brief facts, to the extent necessary, are that the 1st respondent-applicant was working as a Junior Assistant in the Municipal Corporation, Guntur. Consequent upon a trap laid by the A.C.B, while the 1st respondent-applicant was demanding and accepting a bribe of Rs. 800/- to do an official favour, a case was registered against her in C.C. No. 40 of 2000 before the Special Judge for SPE & ACB Cases, Vijayawada. The Special Judge, by order dated 4.3.2006, convicted the 1st respondent-applicant under Section 248(2) Cr.P.C. and sentenced ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1967AP155; 1967CriLJ691
Kumarayya, J.(1) This is a special appeal against the order passed by the Election Tribunal, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh dismissing, with costs of respondent No. 1, the election petition No. 195 of 1962 on the file of the Said Tribunal.(2) The appellant is an elector in Nadendla village. In the general election held on 19-2-1962 for return of a candidate from Phirangipuram constituency to the Legislative Assembly of the Andhra Pradesh State the only two contesting candidates found on the arena were respondent No. 1, Sri K. Brahmananda Reddy, and respondent No. 2, Sri Jagarlamudi Chandramouli. It was a contest close and keen. Respondent No. 1 contested on the ticket and program of the congress Organization and respondent No. 2 was a candidate set up by the Swatantra Party. Both of them had considerable influence over the constituency -- the former being the resident of Tubadu, one of the villages in the constituency and the latter being a member of the Kamma community which, it is said, h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2000(5)ALD51; 2000(4)ALT541; 2000CriLJ4058
ORDERV.V.S. Rao, J.1. These two Public Interest Litigation cases may conveniently be disposed of by a common order as they involve same questions of fact and law. An advocate, who is the President of A.P. Prison Reforms and Legal Aid Committee, filed WP No.32039 of 1998. He prayed for a direction to the State Government to appoint a High Level Commission headed by a sitting or retired High Court Judge, to visit and inspect all the prisons in the State and submit a report concerning the conditions of prisons and prisoners with suggestions as to remedial measures, and to direct the State Government to provide proper accommodation and sufficient vehicles and female police escort to transport female prisoners for the purpose of production in the trial Courts, and such other related prayers.2. WP No.6919 of 1999 is filed by a Journalist and Social Worker praying for a declaration that the action of the respondents viz., Government of Andhra Pradesh, Director-General of Police, and the Inspe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2007CriLJ2102
A. Gopal Reddy, J.1. This matter has come up before this Court on a reference by a learned single Judge of this Court to consider the question:Whether the date of filing of the complaint or the date of the court taking cognizance of the offence is relevant for the purpose of Section 468 Cr.P.C.2. The question of law involved in this case, though short one, has been the subject of conflicting decisions of the Supreme Court in Krishna Pillai v. T.A. Rajendran 1990 (Supp) SCC 121 and Bharat Damodar Kale v. State of Andhra Pradesh 2004 (1) ALD (Crl.) 27 (SC).3. The learned single Judge expressed his inability to agree with the view taken by this Court in Crl.P. No. 3572/2003 wherein it was held that the date of taking cognizance of the offence by the Magistrate is relevant and not the date of filing of the complaint before the court for the purpose of Section 468 Cr.P.C. Hence made the reference. 4. In order to appreciate the question arising for determination, facts-in-brief may be stated...
Tag this Judgment!