Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 18407 (AP)

Singari Satyanarayana v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/16813/2020 · 2025-09-09

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010255382020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 16813/2020 Between: 1. SINGARI SATYANARAYANA, S/O VENKAIAH AGE 42 YEAR R/O D NO 10-527, RAMALAKSHAMMA STREET, MARKAPURAM, ANDHRA PRADESH-523316. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME A. P. SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATI, GUNTUR DISTRICT 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PRAKASAM DISTRICT ...RESPONDENT(S): Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased topleased to issue a Writ Order or direction particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No 2 in not acting procedure contemplated u/s 154 (3) of Cr.P.C in investigating the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer subordinate to him, in the manner provided by this code as illegal, arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and also violations of Article 14,16,19 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No 2 to act in accordance with procedure contemplated u/s 154 (3) of Cr. P.C and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2020 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 to direct the respondent no.2 to act in accordance with law contemplated u/s 154 (3) of Cr.P.C and pass order or orders in accordance with law, pending disposal of the writ petition may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. JADA SRAVAN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 16813 of 2020 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased to issue a Writ Order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.2 in not acting procedure contemplated u/s 154(3) of Cr.P.C in investigating the case himself or direct an investigation to be made by any police officer subordinate to him in the manner provided by this code as illegal arbitrary and violation of principles of natural justice and also violations of Article 14, 16, 19 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondent No.2 to act in accordance with procedure contemplated u/s 154(3) of Cr.P.C and pass.…” 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petition may be disposed of, since the relief has become infructuous in this matter. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for the respondents is in attendance. 4. Recording the above said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________________________ Dr.VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA, J Date: 10th September, 2025 RKS