Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 22261 (AP)

Sk. Rafi, v. Prl.Secy., Home dept., State of A.P.,

WP/14283/2018 · 2025-07-14

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010313932018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION No. 14283/2018 Between: SK. RAFI, S/O. SK. BAILBADEEN, R/O. RANIPET STREET, VENKATAGIRI, S.P.S.R. NELLORE DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. PRL SECY HOME DEPT STATE OF A P, THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. 3. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VENKATAGIRI POLICE STATION, SPSR NELLORE DISTRICT. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. Y MAHA LAKSHMI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “.... a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent keeping the petitioner’s passport unauthorizedly from January 2018 onwards as illegal, improper, unjust, arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice.” 2. Sri Md.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, would submit that the passport of the Petitioner is not 2 recovered by the Police. For ready reference, the written instructions are extracted hereunder: “The investigating Officer did not recover the passport of the Writ Petitioner. After completion of investigation charge sheet is filed before the Court of Judl. Magistrate of First Class, Venkatagiri vide C.C.No.83/2018. At the time of filing of charge sheet the I.O did not file the passport of the Writ Petitioner/Accused also.” 3. Ms.Y.Mahalakshmi, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Court may pass appropriate orders. 4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the Petitioner is at liberty to work out his remedies before appropriate forum in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ________________________________________ Dr.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date:15.07.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.14283 of 2018 Dt.15.07.2025 Dinesh