Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2. The petitioner, i.e., High Court of Andhra Pradesh, at Amaravati, taking decision on administrative side, has preferred to invoke the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, primarily with a view to protect its entity from the attack of some of antisocial elements in our State.
3. The present writ petition was filed with a prayer for issuance of writ of an appropriate writ or order or direction, particularly, writ in the nature of writ of Mandamus:
A. To declare the action of the Respondent Nos.2 to 6 in failing to act progressively and to take necessary action and to invoke the appropriate provisions of law, as mandated, pursuant to the registration of FIR No.16/2020, dated 16.04.2020, and FIR No. 17/2020, dated 18.04.2020 on the file of Respondent No.6 against the said offenders, as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, and in violation of provisions of Criminal Procedure Code and Information Technology Act, 2000, and

(ii) Mani Annapureddy on 15.04.2020. It is evident from running page no.28 of the main writ petition that a complaint, dated 16.04.2020, made by the Registrar General to the Superintendent of Police, Cyber Crimes-CID, Amaravati, that such posts were made due to the reason that the Hon'ble Judge has quashed the Government Order relating to introduction of English Medium in schools. Almost, in the same context, again on 17.04.2020, a written report was submitted under the signature of the Registrar General to the Superintendent of Police, Cyber Crimes, CID, disclosing cognizable offences against the accused persons on an allegation of posting on social media. Two FIRs were lodged; one on 16.04.2020 itself; and second on 18.04.2020. Subsequently, again there were number of posts on social media against the Judges of the High Court, Hon'ble Supreme Court and including High Court itself. Again immediately thereafter, one another written report was filed by the Registrar General of the High Court on 24.05.2020 addressed to the Superintendent of Police, Cyber Crimes, CID. This time again, the Court and the Judges were abused in view of some of the orders passed by this Court. The written report is re-produced herein below:

"B.RAJASEKHAR AMARAVATI REGISTRAR GENERAL Dt.24.05.2020 To The Superintendent of Police, Cyber Crimes - CID, Amaravathi, Andhra Pradesh, Sir, Sub: Complaint regarding abusive, life threatening and intimidating postings in Social Media against the Hon'ble Judges, fabricating material against the High Court and Hon'ble Judges and posting in Social Media to bring hatred, contempt, incite, disaffection and __ ill-will against the High Court and Hon'ble Judges - seeking expeditious registration of case and action as per law - Reg.
10.One CC to Sri C. Pannini Somayaji, Advocate (OPUC)
11.One CC to Sri K. Chidambaram, Advocate (OPUC)
42.One CC to Sri M.Manohar Reddy, Standing Counsel (OPUC)
43.One CC to Sri A. Lakshminarayna, Advocate (OPUC)
14.One CC to Sri A. Rajendrababu, Advocate (OPUC)
15.One CC to Sri N. Harinath, Asst. Solicitor General (OPUC)
16. Two CC to GP for Revenue, High Court of A.P at Amaravati (OUT)
17. The Section Officer, Non-Service Section, High Court of A.P
18. The Registrar General, High Court of A.P at Amaravati (OUT)