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
This civil revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution arises out of the order dated 05.10.2016 passed by the learned XVI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Malkajgiri, in I.A.No.526 of 2016 in O.S.No.778 of 2015. O.S.No.778 of 2015 was filed by the respondent herein for the following reliefs: (a) To evict the defendants from the Suit Schedule Property i.e., all that part and parcel of the Premises consisting of Ground, First, Second and Third floors bearing Survey No.145/A-Part, admeasuring 1805.78 sq. mts (2160 sq. yards) situated at Bachupally village, Pragatinagar Gram Panchayat and to direct the defendants to deliver the vacant and peaceful possession of the same to the Plaintiff, (b) To direct the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.20,24,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lacs Twenty Four thousand only) along with interest @ 24% per annum from 12/06/2015 to till the date of passing judgment and decree and also to pay future interest of 6% pa from the date of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
1. Aggrieved by the order dated 04.07.2013 in C.C.No.195 of 2011 passed by the XIII Special Magistrate, Hyderabad, this revision is filed by the petitioner/complainant. 2. The complainant of a dishonour cheque filed a complaint against two accused/respondents 1 and 2 herein, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short the Act ) and taken cognizance originally before the learned III Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, by allotting C.C.No.1560 of 2009 and on transfer, renumbered before the learned XIII Special Magistrate, Hyderabad, as C.C.No.195 of 2011. It was while pending, the same was returned by detailed order dated 04.07.2013, which is now impugned and the same is after completion of trial and in the course of hearing arguments saying either the Court, which entertained the private complaint by taking cognizance and the Court, which deals with on transfer have no jurisdiction, for the place, where the complainant ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
U. Durga Prasad Rao, J. 1. This appeal is filed by A1 aggrieved by the judgment dated 28.04.2011 in S.C.No.19 of 2002 passed by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Nellore whereby the learned Judge convicted A1 for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer RI for life and to pay fine of Rs.100/- in default to suffer SI for one month, while acquitting A2. 2. The prosecution case is thus: a) A1 and A2 are interrelated and they are also distant relatives of deceased-Pichapati Venkata Subba Reddy and all of them are residents of Ramaswamypalli village of Atmakur Mandal, Nellore District. b) The offence took place on 31.03.2006 at 1 PM at the cattle shed of the deceased in Ramaswamypalli village. Prior to this offence, A1 was involved in one murder case of his daughters. During his remand the deceased did not render financial help or service to A1 though deceased was capable. Further, there were boundary disputes between deceased...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
1. The revision petitioner is the Inspector of Police, who is none other than Accused No.8 in C.C.No.98 of 2013, an outcome of Crime No.15/RCO-ACB-KNR/2011, registered on 14.12.2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 13(1)(a) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for brevity the Act ) and Sections 34 and 120-B of IPC, which is based on occurrence report of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), Kurnool, from a surprise check conducted on 13.12.2011 by intercepting a TATA Victa vehicle belonging to the officials of Excise Department and Rs.3,62,640/- seized from them under the cover of panchanama and the source of money could not be explained by the officials as that was suspected to be the amount collected towards bribe for favouring the owners of Wine Shops, in registering the above crime and from the investigation, including on the searches conducted and seizures effected, the ACB officials filed the final report that was taken cogniz...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
1. This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.69 of 2013 on the file of the Special Court for trial of ACB cases in Rayalaseema Region, Kurnool. 2. The facts leading to the filing of the present petition are, briefly, as follows: The petitioner joined the Government service on 05.12.1978 as Probationary Deputy Tahsildar and got promotions from time to time. The petitioner worked as Special Grade Deputy Collector, Srisailam Project with effect from 01.03.2009 to 28.10.2009. The petitioner retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.2010. On receiving credible information, that the petitioner has acquired disproportionate assets, while functioning as a public servant, the Inspector of Police, ACB registered a case in Crime No.11/RCA-KUR/2009 dated 21.11.2012, against the petitioner, for the offences punishable under Sections 13 (2) r/w 13 (1) (e) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (the P.C.Act). After completion ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Suresh Kumar Kait, J. This Criminal Appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 08.10.2010 delivered in S.C.No. 395 of 2007 by I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Eluru, West Godavari District whereby the accused was found guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and accordingly convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months. The accused has filed the present appeal on the ground that the learned Additional Sessions Judge erred in convicting him by relying upon the testimony of PWs.2 and 3 treating them as eye-witnesses to the occurrence of the offence. The learned Judge also failed to notice the conduct of PWs.2 and 3 that they did not inform anybody in the village much more to PW1, husband of the deceased - Meramma, till the next day which would throw any amount of suspicion on the truth of their evidence. The place of occurrence...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
1. The present Criminal Revision Case is filed by Accused No.1 (for short A.1 ) of Crime No.217 of 2016 of Women Police Station, DD, Hyderabad, aggrieved by the order dated 08.08.2016 in Crl.M.P.No.2305 of 2016 passed by the learned XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Mahila Court), Hyderabad, allowing the petition filed by the State, represented by the Station House Officer, Women s Police Station, D.D., Hyderabad, and directing the petitioner/A.1 to undergo medical test/potency test for Erectile Dysfunction (for short E.D. ) at Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad, on 22.08.2016, with a further direction to the Investigating Officer, Women Police Station, DD, City Crime Station, Hyderabad, to take necessary steps. 2. The contentions in the grounds of revision vis-a-vis the oral submissions in the course of hearing by the learned counsel for A.1 - revision petitioner are that the impugned order of the Court below is contrary to law, wholly unsustainable and failure of just...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
1. This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings dated 24.06.2016 in Crl.R.P.No.111 of 2016 passed by the IV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, whereby confirmed the order dated 18.04.2016 in Crl.M.P.No.1704 of 2015 in C.C.No.33 of 2014 of the IX Special Magistrate Court, Hyderabad. 2. The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.33 of 2014 on the file of the IX Special Magistrate Court, Hyderabad, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short the Act ). The 2nd respondent is the complainant and filed a private complaint against the petitioner/accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act, contending that there is a legally enforceable debt and that the cheque was issued towards discharge of legally enforceable debt, which was dishonoured on presentation. Thereafter, he issued notice in compliance of Section 138 of the Act demanding the petitioner/accused to pay the amount covere...
Tag this Judgment!