Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8048 (AP)

SILAMBARSAN PANNEERSELVEM v. SRI PRABHAKAR B

CC/3728/2025 · 2026-08-06

V Sujatha

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010640802025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE 7th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA CONTEMPT CASE NO: 3728 OF 2025 Between: 1. SILAMBARSAN PANNEERSELVEM, S/o P.Govinda Swamy age 34 years , occ Area Head of Manappuram Finance Ltd , R/o.H.No. 1-393, Beside Costal Bank, Vuyyuru Village and mandal, Krishna District Rep By Authorized Person,Mr. Satyaprakash Sahoo, S/o Khageswar Sahoo, age above 25 years , Occ Area Head of Manappuram Finance Ltd ,0/o. 8-59/3, Sudarshan Towers back side, RTC bus stand Kankipadu, Krishna District. ...Petitioner AND 1. SRI PRABHAKAR B, Occ- Station House Officer, Machilipatnam Town Police station, S/o. Not knwon to this petitioner , Age. Major, C/o. Machilipatnam Town Police station, Krishna District. ...Respondent Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file herein the High Court may be pleased to Pleased to call for the respondent /contemptner and punish them as per Law u/s 10 to 12 of Contempt of Court Act and Art.215 of Constitution of India, for willfully disobeying and descrepting the orders of this Honble court passed In WP.NO. 25407 OF 2024 , dated 11.11.2024 and all other subsequent incidents shows his attitude and pass 2 VS,J C.C.No.3728 of 2025 Counsel for the Petitioner: LAWYERS ADDA LAW FIRM Counsel for the Respondent The Court made the following 3 VS,J C.C.No.3728 of 2025 ORDER: This contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.25407 of 2024, dated 11.11.2024. The operative portion of the said order is extracted hereunder: “…..this court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition by directing respondent No.2 to file the charge sheet as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order….” 2. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner has filed a memo dated 30.06.2026 stating that no further orders are required in the present contempt case, as the order passed by this Court has been complied with by the respondent. 3. In view of the above submission and recording the compliance of the order passed by this Court, the Contempt Case is closed. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, in this case shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA Date: 07.08.2026 KGR