Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 42302 (AP)

MANUKONDA RAMESH BABU v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/36028/2025 · 2025-12-29

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010698332025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 36028/2025 Between: 1. MANUKONDA RAMESH BABU, S/O ADIYYA, AGE 70 YEARS, OCC RETIRED AS CHIEF MANAGER IN STATE BANK OF INDIA, R/O FLAT NO.202, E-BLOCK, JEEVAN VISAKHA, LIE APARTMENTS, MMTC COLONY, SEETAMMADHARA, VISAKHAPATNAM CITY, VISAKHAPATNAM DISTRICT, PIN CODE 530 013. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, PIN CODE 522 237. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, (DGP) CRIME INVESTIGATION DEPARTMENT (CID), MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT, ANDHRA PRADESH, PIN CODE 522 503. 3. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, STATION HOUSE OFFICER, CID PS, A.P., MEDICAL COLLEGE BACKSIDE, KANNAVARITHOTA, GUNTUR DISTRICT, PIN CODE 522 004. ...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 order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in not considering the representation of the petitioner dt 15.09.2025 submitted in connection with the F.I.R.No.66/2022, dt 08.12.2022 registered under Sec.420, 406, 409, 467, 471, r/w 120-B IPC and Sec.13 (2) of PC Act, 1988 as illegal, arbitrary and consequentially direct the respondents 2 and 3 to consider and dispose of the petitioner representation dt 15.09.2025, in the interest of justice and to pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 pleased to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to consider the representation of the petitioner dt: 15.09.2025 submitted in connection with the F.I.R.No.66/2022, dt: 08.12.2022, pending disposal of the main writ petition and to pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. AISHWARYA NAGULA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 36028 of 2025 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with the following prayer for: “…pleased to issue order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents 2 and 3 in not considering the representation of the petitioner dt 15.09.2025 submitted in connection with the F.I.R.No.66/2022, dt 08.12.2022 registered under Sec.420, 406, 409, 467, 471, r/w 120-B IPC and Sec.13 (2) of PC Act, 1988 as illegal, arbitrary and consequentially direct the respondents 2 and 3 to consider and dispose of the petitioner representation dt 15.09.2025, in the interest of justice and to pass.…” 2. Heard Ms.Aishwarya Nagula, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home and Sri S.Syam Sundar Rao, learned Special Public Prosecutor for CID. 3. Sri P.Ajay Babu, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that the investigation in this matter is endorsed to the CID. 4. Sri S.Syam Sundar Rao, learned Special Public Prosecutor for CID would submit that the petitioner has submitted representation to the investigating officer in this matter. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice to give direction to the investigating officer to look into representation of the petitioner, during the course of investigation and take appropriate decision. 6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for CID would submit that the investigating officer cannot pass any orders on such representations but the court may pass appropriate orders. 7. Considering the submissions made, these Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the investigating officer-respondent No.3 is directed to look into the grievance of the petitioner during the course of investigation and take appropriate decision over the matter and conclude the investigation according to the law. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________________________ Dr. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Date: 30.12.2025. TVN HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.36028 of 2025 Dated.30.12.2025 TVN 300