SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(AP) 523

NOUSHAD ALI
Samudrala Satyanarayana – Appellant
Versus
State of A. P. – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:J.C.H.Y. Narasimham, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Government Pleader for Home.

Judgment :

1. This writ petition suffers from serious laches since the incidents, which the petitioner claims as cause of action to this writ petition, have occurred in 2001 and even the last representation was made in the year 2004.

2. The petitioner is alleged to have been wrongfully confined by respondent No.5, who was the then Sub-Inspector of Police at Madhira Police Station, during 29-05-2001 to 04-06-2001 in connection with Crime No.218/SI-CI/2001 dated 09-04-2001 for the offence under Section 379 IPC. In the said crime, the petitioner was not shown as accused and it was registered against some unknown persons. It is alleged that during the investigation of the matter, the petitioner was taken into custody on 29-05-2001 and was wrongfully confined in the police station upto 04-06-2001 and the 5th respondent had allegedly collected Rs.30,000/- from his sister and father to release him on bail.

3. It appears that after investigation, one Ramiseeti Hanumantha Rao was shown as the accused and he was prosecuted in C.C.No.361 of 2001 in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Madhira. According to the petitioner, he was shown as LW.6 in the aforesaid criminal case an








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top