Disposed

Theegala Ganga Reddy v. the State of Telangana

Telangana HC12 Mar 2018WP/4233/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court recorded written instructions furnished by the Sub-Inspector of Police denying allegations of interference with petitioners' liberty or misuse of powers in a land dispute. The Court then disposed of the writ petition by placing said instructions on record without adjudicating the merits of the petitioner's complaints. No costs awarded.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed by placing police instructions on record; no order as to costs.

Theegala Ganga Reddy Vs the State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2018)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE A.V.SESHA SAI

¶2

W .P.No.4 2 3 3 of 2 0 1 8

¶3

ORDER : -

¶4

When the matter is taken up, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that on the complaint of the sixth respondent, the police registered a case in Crime No.4 of 2018 and taken up the investigation. The written instructions furnished by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Raikal Police Station, Jagityal District, dated 09.02.2018, are placed on record by the learned Government Pleader. The said instructions, to the extent of their relevance for the purpose of this writ petition, read as under: -

¶5

“Except conducting the investigation into the above criminal case as contemplated under law, this respondent police never interfered with the life and liberty of the petitioners herein.

¶6

Copy of the FIR is annexed to this written instructions for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court.

¶7

It is submitted that the allegations of the petitioner that in view of the hike of the land rates, the 6^th respondent developed grudge against them and approached the Superintendent of Police/ 3^rd respondent claiming their land and then onwards the 3^rd respondent/ Superintendent of Police calling them to his Office through his constables and high handedly directing them to hand over the possession of the land to the 6^th respondent otherwise they will be implicated him in false cases and the 3^rd respondent/ Superintendent of Police, Jagityal District illegally visited their land on 18.01.2018 with his constables and directed them to settle the matter with the 6^th respondent and hand over the possession to him otherwise stating that they will be implicated in false cases and that the 3^rd respondent by using his official powers again on 22.01.2018 sent his constables to their house and took them to the 3^rd respondent office, where the Superintendent of Police/ 3^rd respondent directed them to sit in his office till night hours and threatened them stating that settle the dispute with the 6^th respondent and they have requested the 3^rd respondent not to interfere with the civil disputes and shown their title documents relating to the subject property, without considering the same,

¶8

¶9

the 3^rd respondent slapped the 1^st petitioner and scolded in filthy language are absolutely false, baseless and hence denied.

¶10

It is submitted that the allegation of the petitioner that the 3^rd respondent/ Superintendent of Police by misusing his powers with the help of the 5^th respondent and his constables calling them to the police station regularly and threatening them to sit in the police station till the night hours and the respondents 3 and 5 exceeding their jurisdiction in collusion with the respondent No.6 making attempts to grab their property and that on 04.02.2018 in the morning around 8 am, the 3^rd respondent called them to his office through his constable and threatened them to sit in his office and further threatened them to attend his office daily till the possession of their land is handed over to the 6^th respondent, otherwise stating that criminal cases will be initiated against them and helplessly, they requested the 3^rd respondent not to harass them but the 3^rd respondent without considering their request and documents by misusing his official powers torturing them to hand over the possession of the land to the 6^th respondent is utterly false and hence denied.

¶11

It is submitted that the allegation of the petitioner that the respondents 3 to 5 are not taking any action on their complaints against the 6^th respondent is false and hence denied. The allegation of the petitioner that there is every threat from the hands of the Superintendent of Police/ 3^rd respondent as well as the 5^th respondent is false, baseless and hence denied.”

¶12

Having regard to the above instructions and taking into consideration of the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader, this Court deems it fit and proper to dispose of the writ petition by placing the above instructions on record. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶13

______________ A.V.Sesh a Sai, J

¶14

Date: 12.03.2018 smr

Theegala Ganga Reddy v. the State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Theegala Ganga Reddy v. the State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P. Nagabhushana Rao Vs The union of india

Muralidhar Rudraboina Vs The State of Telangana

D. Ramesh, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Ambujalapu Ramakrishna Vs State of Telangana

Puppala Rajani Kanth Vs The State of Telangana

K.Rajaji, Vs State of Andhra Pradesh