Letters Patent Appeal No. 7 of 2016. Case: Ashwini Sattaru Vs P. Venkat Reddy. High Court of Andhra Pradesh (India)
| Case Number | Letters Patent Appeal No. 7 of 2016 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: K.M. Nataraj, Additional Solicitor General for B. Narayana Reddy, Assistant Solicitor General and For Respondents: M. Atish Kumar, Counsel |
| Judges | C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy and T. Rajani, JJ. |
| Issue | Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Section 12 |
| Citation | 2017 (2) ALT 663, 2017 (3) ALD 220 |
| Judgement Date | January 19, 2017 |
| Court | High Court of Andhra Pradesh (India) |
Judgment:
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy, J.
-
This Letters Patent Appeal arises out of order, dated 30.11.2016, in Contempt Case No. 2136 of 2016, whereby the learned single Judge while holding the appellant not guilty of violation of the order, dated 23.8.2016, in Writ Petition No. 14957 of 2016, however, imposed costs of ` 15,000/- on her. The facts leading to filing of this appeal are briefly stated hereunder: At the instance of the respondent, a criminal case was instituted, which was taken on file as C.C. No. 1200 of 2015 on the file of the learned XX Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Malkajgiri, against two persons by names Bollampally Narsimha Reddy and Bollampally Sulochana. Anticipating that the accused may flee justice by leaving the country, the respondent has made a representation, dated 02.03.2016, to the appellant to prevent the accused from leaving the country by impounding their passports. As no action was taken on the said representation, he has filed Writ Petition No. 14957 of 2016 in April, 2016 for a Mandamus to declare the inaction of the appellant in disposing of his representation, dated 02.3.2016, made for impounding the passports of the accused pending disposal of C.C. No. 1200 of 2015.
-
The learned single Judge disposed of the said Writ Petition by order, dated 23.8.2016, with the direction to the appellant to consider the representation, dated 02.3.2016, of the respondent and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. Alleging that due to non-compliance of the said order by the appellant, the accused have left the country on 10.9.2016, the respondent has filed the afore-mentioned Contempt Case.
-
Though no separate counter-affidavit was filed, the appellant has filed an affidavit in the context of seeking suspension of the operation of order, dated 30.11.2016, in Contempt Case No. 2136 of 2016 to the extent of imposing costs of ` 15,000/- on her, wherein she has inter alia stated that during the pendency of Writ Petition No. 14957 of 2016, a show cause notice was issued on 24.6.2016 to the accused proposing impounding of their passports; that meanwhile, the office of the appellant has received order, dated 23.8.2016, of this Court in Writ Petition No. 14957 of 2016 on 06.9.2016; that as per the procedure laid down in the Passport Manual, the office of the appellant has again issued show cause notice, dated 15.9.2016, to the accused; that as...
To continue reading
Request your trial