MURALA GOPINADH Vs. STATION HOUSE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is filed for the following relief:

(2.) This Court has heard the party in person, who attempted valiantly to justify his stand and the learned Government Pleader for Home.

(3.) A reading of the affidavit shows that the petitioner is dissatisfied with the sequence of events that occurred in the Court of II Judicial First Class Magistrate at Rajahmundry in C.C.No.133 of 2010. He was also dissatisfied with the manner in which he was arrested. The fact remains that he is a party to a matrimonial dispute filed against him by the 2nd respondent. Particular stress was laid upon the procedure in C.C.No.133 of 2010 in which the petitioner is accused No.1. He is dissatisfied with the manner in which a non-bailable warrant has been issued and has also filed a perjury application which is returned a number of times. An application for certified copies were also supposedly returned. He also states that there is tampering of a docket order. Basing on these allegations, the party in person prays for this Courts interference. He also blames a number of persons, who appeared and calls them gundas in Court, who prevented him from appearing in the Rajahmundry and the Nuzvid Courts. Therefore, he prays for a writ of prohibition and certiorari. He also produced some of the case law on the subject. The ultimate prayer is for a writ of prohibition and certiorari stating that to call for the records with reference to the proceeding in C.C.No.133 of 2010 on the file of the II Judicial First Class Magistrate, Rajahmundry, quashing of proceedings and to send the same to the Hon'ble Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nizvid for trial.