IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 4288 of 2008 Between: Mary Philip @ Jessy Paul, W/o. L.T.Ratna Paul Christian, R/o.Nandyal, Kurnool Dist., ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Addl. Director Geneal of Police (CID), Andhra Pradesh, At Hyderabad. 2 Superintendent of Police, C.B.C.I.D, Regional Crime Investigation Unit. Kurnool. 3 S.H.O, II Town Police Station, Kurnool. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Aﬃdavit ﬁled herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus for appropriate Writ or order or direction declaring the action of the Respondents in displaying name of the Petitioner's husband i.e., L.T.Rathna Paul, S/o.L.T.Alexander as most wanted Criminal in the website as illegal, arbitrary and consequently direct the Respondents to delete the name of the Petitioners husband Mr.L.T.Rathna Paul, S/o.L.T.Alexander shown as wanted criminal from website i.e., Criminal Intelligence Gazette in the interest of justice and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.K.SURESH REDDY Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR HOME The Court made the following : THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No. 4288 of 2008 O R D E R : This writ petition is ﬁled seeking a declaration that the action of the respondents in displaying name of the petitioner’s husband by name L.T.Rathna Paul as most wanted criminal in website is arbitrary and illegal. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record. In the counter aﬃdavit ﬁled by the Inspector of Police, CID Regional Crime Investigation Unit, it has been stated that the petitioner’s husband was shown as an accused in Crime No.39 of 2002 and Crime No. 52 of 2002 for the oﬀences punishable under Section 420 IPC on the ﬁle of Kurnool II Town P.S. and Bethamcherla P.S. respectively and subsequently they were transferred to CID RCIU for further investigation. After completion of the investigation, both the cases were charged on 18-06- 2005 and 13-04-2004 before the Court of the Principal District Judge (Special Court) Kurnool in which the petitioner’s husband was arrayed as accused No.2. However, since he was absconding from the date of the FIR and his whereabouts were not known in spite of stringent eﬀorts, the ﬁrst respondent put his details and photo in CID website to get information to know about his whereabouts. However, the fact that the said two criminal cases taken on ﬁle pursuant to the crime No.39 of 2002 and 52 of 2002 were closed by the special Court by order dated 11-07-2007 in pursuance of the common order passed by this Court in Company Application No.309 of 2007 and 310 of 2007 in Company Petition No.144 of 2001 has not been disputed by the respondents. Thus, it is clear that the two criminal cases registered against the petitioner were closed long back in the year 2007 itself. Hence, there is absolutely no justiﬁable reason to continue the display the name of the petitioner’s husband in the website as most wanted criminal. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed with a direction to the respondents to delete the name of the petitioner’s husband from the website as most wanted criminal forthwith. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 04-11-2008 KLP