Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 54148 (AP)

PEETHALA VINAY KUMAR v. THE STATE OF AP

WP/29871/2025 · 2025-11-05

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010577402025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] THURSDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 29871/2025 Between: 1. PEETHALA VINAY KUMAR, S/O.P.I.N.V. KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC:PILOT, R/O.MISSION HIGH SCHOOL ROAD, NARASAPURAM, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT, CURRENTLY RESIDING AT FLAT NO.405, BLOCK-A, HALLMARK SUNNY SIDE APARTMENTS, MANCHIRAVULA VILLAGE, GANDIPET MANDAL, HYDERABAD,TELANGANA STATE. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF AP, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE AMARAVATHI. 2 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, DGP OFFICE, MANGALAGIRI. 3. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM URBAN, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 4. 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MAHILA POLICE STATION, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 5. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PRAKASH NAGAR POLICE STATION, RAJAMAHENDRAVARAM, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT. 6. 6. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS UNDER SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, JAISLAMER HOUSE, NEW DELHI. 7. BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION, EAST BLOCK VIII, R.K.PURAM, NEW DELHI. REP. BY ITS DEPUTY DIRECTOR. ...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 to Issue a writ, order or direction, particularly in the nature of Mandamus to Declare the action of Respondents in issuance of a Look- Out Circular against the petitioner in connection with Crime No. 59/2025 of Mahila Police Station, Rajamahendravaram, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and 2 consequently direct the respondents to recall the Look- Out Circular issued against the petitioner and 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 to suspend the operation of the impugned Look-Out Circular and permit the petitioner to travel abroad for discharge of his official duties, and pass such further orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. N SIVA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 3 The Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the Petitioner, seeking the following relief: “ ... to issue a writ, order or direction, particularly in the nature of Mandamus to Declare the action of Respondents in issuance of a Look-Out Circular against the petitioner in connection with Crime No.59/2025 of Mahila Police Station, Rajamahendravaram, as illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to recall the Look- Out Circular issued against the petitioner and Pass ...” Heard Sri N.Siva Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent State. Perused the material on record. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that basing on the complaint given by the wife of the Petitioner, a case in Crime No.59 of 2025 of Mahila UPS, East Godavari District was registered against A.1 to A.4, wherein, Petitioner was arrayed as A.1, for the offences punishable under Section 85 read with 3(5) of BNS, and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Further, Petitioner is working as First Officer/Pilot (Flight Operations) with Indigo Airlines. Further, Petitioner cooperated with the investigating agency at all times. But respondent Police issued Look Out Notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS dated 21.10.2025. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader on written instructions, would submit that after issuing Notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS, 4 Petitioner is cooperating to the investigating agency and this Court may pass appropriate orders by disposing of this Writ Petition. In that view, the Look-out Notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS is hereby set aside. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. No order as to costs. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. DR.JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Mjl/* 5 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA Writ Petition No. 29871 of 2025 05.11.2025 Mjl /*