Chevella Narsimlu vs The State Of Telangana
2021 Latest Caselaw 1607 Tel

Item No.3



      THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
                                   AND
      THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY


                     WRIT APPEAL No.284 of 2020

JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hima Kohli)


1.     The appellant/writ petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated

04.08.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing a writ

petition filed by him (W.P.No.10675 of 2020) praying inter alia for

taking action against the respondents No.6 and 7, both posted as

Sub-Inspectors at Keshampet Police Station, on the ground that they

had misused their official position by picking him up and taking him

to the police station on 06.07.2020 and indiscriminately beating him

up without any complaint or case registered against him.

2. By the impugned order, the learned Single Judge has dismissed

the writ petition on the ground that the appellant/writ petitioner has

approached the court with unclean hands and has resorted to

fabrication and falsification of records thereby disentitling him to

grant of any relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner assails the

impugned order on the ground that the learned Single Judge has erred

in arriving at the conclusion that the appellant/writ petitioner had

approached this court by falsifying the medical records to gain

sympathy of the court and if there are any interpolation in the medical

records of the appellant/writ petitioner, the same are on account of the

mistake of the hospital authorities for which he cannot be blamed.

Learned counsel further states that assuming that the request of the

appellant/writ petitioner for being admitted into the hospital was

turned down, that alone cannot be a reason to ignore the injuries

sustained by him at the hands of the respondents No.6 and 7.

4. We have carefully gone through the medical case sheets filed

by the appellant/writ petitioner along with the present appeal at page

19 and find that nowhere in the MLC, has it been recorded that the

appellant/writ petitioner had suffered any abrasions, bruises, soft

tissue injuries or injury on any part of his body to substantiate his

submission that the respondents No.6 and 7 had assaulted him.

5. In view of the above, there was no good reason to entertain the

writ petition filed by the appellant/writ petitioner seeking an enquiry

by the respondents No.2 to 5 against the respondents No.6 and 7 on

the ground that they had assaulted him and caused him bodily injuries.

Even if the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant/writ

petitioner to the effect that any error in the medical record was due to

a mistake on the part of the hospital is accepted, it would not take his

case any further, in view of the observations made hereinabove

relating to absence of any observations recorded in the MLC of the

appellant/writ petitioner conducted by the hospital authorities on

06.07.2020 that he had suffered abrasions/physical injury and as his

medical case sheet shows that he was admitted at 5.30 PM and was

discharged on the same day at 8:00 PM after a medico legal

examination. In other words, the appellant/writ petitioner was not

even admitted in the hospital for any treatment.

6. For the aforesaid reasons, we do not see any reason to interfere

in the impugned judgment, which is upheld. The present appeal is

dismissed as meritless along with the pending applications, if any.

______________________________ HIMA KOHLI, CJ

______________________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J

10.06.2021 JSU/PLN