THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
Public Interest Litigation No.156 of 2014
DATED:23.6.2014 Between:
M. Bandi Vasudeva Murthy, Prakasam District.
And Government of Andhra Pradesh, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Hyderabad and others.
… Petitioner ….Respondents THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR
Public Interest Litigation No.156 of 2014
Order: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This Public Interest Litigation has been filed seeking to have the following relief from the Court:
“To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus to declare the action of the third respondent in preparing two F.I.Rs. in one case i.e., F.I.R. No.134/2014 by changing the names of the accused persons as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and consequently direct the 2nd respondent herein to take immediate action against the 3rd respondent herein in accordance with law and to entrust the investigation of Crime No.134/2014 to C.B.C.I.D. or any other independent investigating agency and to grant such other relief or reliefs:
The story unfolded before us by the writ petitioner is summarized hereunder:
The 4th respondent made a complaint to the Station House Officer, Ongole I town Police Station, Prakasam District complaining about the commission of offence mentioning the names therein. However, the above Officer drawn up the F.I.R. as per the complaint made. Thereafter, he thought it fit to bring few new names and to exclude the names, as originally recorded in the first F.I.R.
The petitioner did not make any complaint. Neither the bank nor the persons whose names are recorded in the first F.I.R. have come forward to question subsequent redrawing of FIR. We feel that in a case of this nature, the persons whose names are included in the F.I.R. are the affected persons and they could very well approach. They could have taken steps and on their behalf, the petitioner cannot bring action in abuse of the process of this Court, by filing a public interest litigation. We think that no element of public interest is involved in this matter.
Accordingly, we dismiss the Public Interest Litigation. However, it would be open for either the bank concerned, if so advised, or the persons whose names are mentioned in the F.I.R., to approach the appropriate forum in accordance with law.
Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed. No costs.
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ SANJAY KUMAR, J 23rd June, 2014 pnb/cbs