Telangana High Court
Gaddam Laxman vs The State Of Telangana, Rep.By Its ... on 18 April, 2022
Author: Abhinand Kumar Shavili
Bench: Satish Chandra Sharma, Abhinand Kumar Shavili
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI
WRIT PETITION (PIL) No.328 OF 2017
ORDER:(Per Hon'ble Sri Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili) This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:
"..... to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents herein in carrying out extra judicial killing of eight people in the name of encounter on 14.12.2017 at Nelamadugu Village, Gangaram Gram Panchayat, Tekulapally Mandal, Bhadadri Area, Kothagudem District, as being illegal and against law and violation of Art 21 of the Constitution of India and also violation of covenant on Human Rights ratified by Union of India and further direct the respondent No. 2 herein to register a crime u/sec 302 IPC and under appropriate section of law and to entrust the investigation to Special Investigation Team SIT under the monitoring of the Honble High Court and consequently to conduct the postmortem of the deceased persons by the team of Forensic Experts by keeping the dead bodies in a proper preservation and handover the bodies to the deceased family members.'
02. Heard Sri V.Raghunath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the official respondents.
03. It has been contended by the petitioner that a news item was published on 14.12.2017, wherein it was reported that an encounter took place at Nelamadugu Village, Gangaram Gram Panchayat, Tekulapally Mandal, Bhadadri Area, 2 Kothagudem District. Eight persons were killed in the encounter, who happed to be between the age group of 25 to 30 years, and the police are not registering any crime under Section 302 IPC against the persons, who were involved in the fake encounter and only a crime was registered under Section 307 IPC against them.
04. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had contended that appropriate orders be passed in the writ petition directing the respondents to take appropriate action against the persons, who were involved in the fake encounter. Learned counsel placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in People' Union for Civil Liberties and another v. State of Maharashtra and others 1, whereunder the Apex Court has framed guidelines in the matters of encounters.
04. On behalf of the respondent-State counter-affidavit has been filed stating that the State has followed the guidelines as set out by the Apex Court in People' Union for Civil Liberties and another v. State of Maharashtra and others.
05. Having considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, this Court is of the considered view that in the counter-affidavit filed by the State, 1 (2014) 10 SCC 635 3 it was specifically stated that it has followed the guidelines as prescribed by the Apex Court in People' Union for Civil Liberties and another v. State of Maharashtra and others, no further orders need to be passed in the writ petition since crime is registered against the persons, who are responsible for the encounter.
06. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, the respondent-State shall ensure that fair trial is conducted in the FIR which is registered against the persons, who are responsible for the encounter, and the respondents should take note of the guidelines prescribed by the Apex Court in the case referred to supra. No order as to costs.
With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
______________________________ SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, CJ ________________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J Date: 18.04.2022 rkk 4