GOGULA LINGAMMA Vs. GOVT OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition was filed by the unfortunate mother, aged about 60 years of the deceased G. Gijay, who was alleged to have been murdered by the second respondent Jalagam Sudershan Rao and his associates on 4-3-1995 on account of political rivalry, seeking for the relief to declare G.O. Rt. No. 452 Home (Police F) Department dated 25-2-1999 withdrawing the criminal case in SC No. 528 of 1996 on the file of the I Addl. Sessions Judge. Nalgonda, as illegal, null and void and to pass such others as the Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(2.) It is stated by the petitioner Smt. Gogula Lingamma, that the second respondent is alleged to have filed representation dated 23-7-98 to the Honourable Minister for Home Affairs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad to consider his case and suggest the Public Prosecutor, Naglonda under S. 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for brevity the Code) to delete his name from the arena of accused. Therefore, after obtaining the opinion of Public Prosecutor, Nalgonda and Director General of Police, Hyderabad, the Government passed the impugned order suggesting the Public Prosecutor, Nalgonda under S. 321 of the Code to withdraw criminal case in SC No. 528 of 1996 pending on the file of the 1 Addl. Sessions Judge, Nalgonda against the second respondent.

(3.) Questioning the said Government Order, the present writ petition is filed contending that there are no merits in the application submitted by the second respondent so as to order to withdraw the criminal case against the second respondent, that while passing the impugned order the Government has not assigned any reasons but only on the ground that the second respondent is Z.P.T.C. Member belonging to Telugu Desam Party and a dogmatic follower of the local Minister, late Sri A. Madhava Reddy, the impugned G.O. came to be passed by the Government which is illegal and contrary to law offending principles of natural justice and provisions of Indian Constitution. It is further contended that based on the application made by the Addl. Public Prosecutor, under S. 321 of the Code the Addl. Sessions Judge, Nalgonda by his order dated 12/03/1999 discharged the respondent No. 2 -- accused No. 1 in the criminal case and the Sessions Case is pending against other 11 accused.