Petitioner challenged inaction in a police investigation regarding a property dispute alleged to be civil. Court directed police to complete investigation and file final report within four weeks pending Commissioner's decision on civil nature reference.
Complete investigation and file appropriate final report within four weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY
WRIT PETITION No.7199 of 2012
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking a mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not investigating into Crime No.77 of 2010 registered on the file of the third respondent – Station House Officer, Kalapathar Police Station, Hyderabad, as illegal and arbitrary.
Petitioner filed a private complaint before the learned III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, stating that on 08.09.2008, her husband entered into an agreement of sale with Kubra Begum, Vijeda Begum, Sameena Begum, Aamena Begum and
Md. Muqtar with regard to house property bearing No.194-14/B/212 situated at Fatimanagar, Vattepally, Hyderabad, and they received earnest money but after the death of her husband, when she asked them to register a document in her favour, she came to know that the said persons got registered gift deed in favour of one Md.Baqir Ali in respect of the said property. Pursuant to reference of such complaint, the third respondent registered the same as a case in Crime No.77 of 2010 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 506 and
120-B IPC. In this Writ Petition, it is the grievance of the petitioner that though aforesaid crime was registered in 2010, the respondents are not taking further steps.
On instructions, it is submitted by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents that during the course of investigation, petitioner was examined as L.W.1 and her statement was recorded and that the third respondent has issued notices to her to produce witnesses and relevant documents for the purpose of investigation but she failed to do so. It is further submitted that as the dispute between the petitioner and the accused in the crime in question is of civil nature, the third respondent sought permission from the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Charminar Division, Hyderabad, to refer the case as ‘civil nature’. It is also submitted that after obtaining such permission, appropriate final report would be filed at the earliest possible time.
As much as the only grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents are not conducting investigation into Crime No.77 of 2010, in view of the submission of the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents that permission is sought from the Assistant Commissioner of Police concerned for
filing appropriate final report by referring the case as ‘civil nature’,
I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents to complete the investigation and file appropriate final report in the crime in question within a period of four (4) weeks from today.
Subject to the above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
In view of disposal of the Writ Petition, WPMP.No.9095 of 2012 also stands disposed of.
______________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J
21st MARCH, 2012.
kvni
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere when the police claim the dispute is of civil nature and sought permission to refer the case for filing a final report?
Whether the High Court can direct the police to complete investigation and file a final report within a specified timeframe despite civil nature allegations?
Petitioner
Respondents
R.SUBHASH REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
