IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.8696 of 2014 BETWEEN N. Shabben Thaj.
AND ... PETITIONER Government of A.P., rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. K. RAMAKOTAIAH Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard.
2. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that no steps are being taken by respondent No.4, in particular, with regard to issuance of Red Corner Notice against respondent No.5, who is A1 in CC.No.254 of 2011 on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Madanapalle.
3. Petitioner states that she married respondent No.5 on 30.08.2008 and allegedly, dowry and gold ornaments were given by her parents apart from spending huge amount for the marriage. Petitioner, subsequently, joined respondent No.5 but on allegation of harassment of dowry, the petitioner left the matrimonial home and lodged a complaint with respondent No.4 on 18.03.2011, which was registered as Cr.No.48 of 2011 against respondent No.5 and his family members under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 2 and 3 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Petitioner also claimed that she filed domestic violence case bearing DVC.No.17 of 2012 before the Junior Civil Judge, Madanapalle and M.C.No.60 of 2012 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Madanapalle claiming maintenance. While the said proceedings are pending, respondent No.5 appears to have left for Saudi Arabia and in spite of non-bailable warrant issued by the learned Magistrate, no action is taken by respondent No.4 to secure the presence of respondent No.5.
4. Petitioner, therefore, seeks relief against the inaction of respondent No.4, in particular, in taking necessary steps for issuance of Red Corner Notice against respondent No.5, who is A1 in CC.No.254 of 2011.
5. Instructions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home state that after completion of investigation in the crime aforesaid, a charge sheet has been filed before the II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Madanapalle and the said Court has issued non-bailable warrant against A1. It is further stated that though respondent No.5 is reported to be residing in Saudi Arabia, the Superintendent of Police, Chittoor, respondent No.2 herein submitted a requisition to the Additional Director General of Police, CID, AP, Hyderabad on 27.03.2014 with a request to issue Red Corner Notice against A1. Hence, it is stated that the orders of the Additional Director General of Police are awaited and meanwhile, all efforts are being made to fish out the exact address of A1.
6. It is evident that respondents 2 and 4 have acted in the matter and have taken necessary steps including sending request for issuance of Red Corner Notice against A1. Since the requisition is pending from March onwards, the allegation of the petitioner that no steps are being taken by respondents 2 and 4 in the direction of issuance of Red Corner Notice to secure the presence of A1 is not substantiated and on the contrary, the instructions, as recorded above, show that respondents 2 and 4 have taken necessary steps. Hence, no further orders are necessary to be passed in this writ petition except directing respondents 2 and 4 to pursue the matter and take appropriate effective steps to secure the presence of A1 and produce him before the learned Magistrate expeditiously.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J October 16, 2014 DSK