Single-line order disposing of a writ petition challenging police harassment. The court noted allegations were denied in the counter-affidavit and disposed of the matter without adjudication on merits.
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.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITON No.24609 of 2018
ORDER:
This writ petition is filed challenging the action of respondent No.3 in harassing the petitioner to settle the issue with the unofficial respondents and threatening that he will be booked in several criminal cases if he does not heed to the demands made by respondent No.3 and making him to sit in the police station hours together.
Counter affidavit is filed on behalf of respondent-police stating that they never threatened the petitioner that he will be booked in several criminal cases and they also denied the petitioner made a complaint on 23-06-2017 before respondent No.3 against respondents 4 and 5 in respect of incident dated 23-06-2017. In fact basing on the complaint of respondent No.5, a case in Cr.No.65 of 2017 is registered against the petitioner and others and investigation is under progress. It is stated that investigation officer altered section of law from Sections 143, 324, 323, 506 read with Section 149 IPC to 143, 326, 323, 506 read with Section 149 IPC. The petitioner has been absconding and to avoid investigation making false allegations against respondent No.3.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner who reiterated the submissions in the writ affidavit.
Heard learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.
Since the allegations made by the petitioner are denied in the counter affidavit, recording the same, the writ petition is
2
disposed of. The allegation of the respondent-police that the petitioner is not cooperating with the investigation. In such a case, it is open for the respondent-police to take appropriate action, if the petitioner is not cooperating with the investigation. As a sequel to the disposal of this petition, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
_________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY,J
16-08-2018 Nvl
3
Petitioner
Respondent-No.3
Respondent-Police
A.RAJASHEKER REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
