Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 7301 (AP)

SYED SUMIA FANOOS v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

WP/4346/2021 · 2025-09-15

Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010073022021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] TUESDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 4346/2021 Between: SYED SUMIA FANOOS, W/O. SYED KHALEELULLAH AGED 29 YEARS R/O. D.NO. 3-2-245, ATMAKUR STREET, RAYADURG TOWN, ANANTAPURAM DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS VELAGAPUDI VILLAGE, AMARAVATHI. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, ANDHRA PRADESH 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT 4. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, RAYADURG P.S., ANANTHAPUR DISTRICT. 5. SYED KHALEELULLA, S/O. LATE SYED UBEDULLA AGED 35 YEARS, R/O. KALUGODU MOHALLA, MOLAKALMURU TOWN CHITRADURGA DISTRICT, KARNATAKA. ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. ARUN SHOWRI GORREMUCHU Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME 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 Respondent No. 4 in not taking executing the Non Bailable Warrant issued by Hon'ble Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rayadurg in M.C,No.12 of 2013 against the Respondent No.5 herein as illegal, arbitrary and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed to me under Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India with a consequential direction to the Respondents to execute the Non Bailable 2 Warrants pending against the Respondent No.5 in M.C,No.13 of 2012 issued by Hon'ble Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Rayadurg.” 2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri G.Arun Showri, learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that no further orders are required in this matter and the petition may be closed. 3. Sri V.Farooq, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, would submit that Court may pass appropriate orders. 4. Considering the submissions made, the Writ Petition is closed. 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:16.09.2025 Dinesh 3 HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA W.P.No.4346 of 2021 Dt.16.09.2025 Dinesh