Dismissed

Sri. Khatighar Shankar Rao and 5 others v. The State of Telangana and 11 others

Telangana HC7 Sept 2020WP/14850/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed against police station alleging civil interference during a land dispute over possession of Survey No. 773. The court held that police are limited to investigation of registered crimes and were not involved in the civil dispute. Petition dismissed with no costs and pending criminal complaints noted for investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed without costs; police to proceed with investigation into the registered criminal cases.

Sri. Khatighar Shankar Rao and 5… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA (Special Original J urisdiction)

¶2

MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 148s0 OF 2020

¶6

Between:

¶7

Sri Khatighar Shankar Rao, S/o. K. Manik Rao, Aged about 50 years, R/o H.No.14-10-619, Dhool pet, Hyderabad

¶8

Sri Pujari Nagender, S/o Balaram, Aged about 68 years, R/o H.No.15-479/1, New ltlaruthi Nagar, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad

¶9

Sri N. Surender, S/o Late Yellusa, Aged about 68 years, R/o H.No.13-1-601/'17, Andhra Colony, Mangalhat, Hyderabad

¶10

Sri Yeshwanth Rao Chouhan, S/o Chouhan Balram, Aged about 62 years, R/o H.No.13-1-601/17, Andhra Colony, Mangalhat, Hyderabad

¶11

Sri Ratan Jawahar, S/o Late R. Laxman Shah Aged about 68 years, R/o H. No. 1 3-2-9 42, Kagaziguda, Puranapool, Hyderabad

¶12

Smt. G. Geetha Bai, W/o Narsing Rao, Aged about 59 years, R/o H.No.13-2-61l50, CIB Quarters, Raheempura, Hyderabad

¶13

...PETITIONERS

¶14

AND

¶15

'1 . The State of Telangana, Rep. by Home Secretary, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶16

The Superintendent of Police, Sanga Reddy District.

¶17

The Station House Officer, Sanga Reddy Rural

¶18

Nagari Pandusa, S/o N. Balaram, Aged about 55 years, No 13-2-361112, Rahimpura, Jali Hanuman, Hyderabad

¶19

Khatighar Ramulu, S/o Narsingh Rao, Aged about 55 years, N o 1 3-2-41 41 5, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad

¶20

Omkari Dattatri, S/o O. Narsing, Aged about 50^years, No 13-2-177, Khagaziguda, Hyderabad

¶21

Dagudu Ashok Kumar, S/o Dagudu Sathyanarayan R/ o 14-10-1084, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad

¶22

Smt. Suvarna, W/o Nagari Pandusa, Age. Major, Rlo 13-2-361112, Rahimpura, dali Hanuman, Hyderabad

¶23

L Dagudu Rakesh Kumar, S/o Dagudu Sathyanarayan Rio 14-10-1084, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad

¶24

Omkari Rupesh, S/O.O Narsing Rlo 13-2-18111, Khagaziguda, Hyderabad

¶25

Nagari Surya Prakash, S/o B. Balaram Aged about 48 years H.No.5-8-47, Chirag Ali Lane, Abids, Hyderabad

¶26

K. Arun Kumar, S/o N. Ramulu Age. 39^years, R/o 13-2-41415, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad

¶27

.,,RESPONDENTS

¶28

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction a) By declaring the action of the Respondent no.3 in involving civil dispute or in asking the Petitioners to settle the matter with the unofficial respondents despite pendency of the civil cases, as illegal and u nconstitutional. b)To direct the Respondent no.3 not to disturb the Petitioners peaceful possession or work and not to call the Petitioners to P.S. for settlement of dispute with unofficial respondents, in respect of land admeasuring 1 Acres 28 guntas in Survey. No.773, situated at Kandi Village, Sangareddy Mandal, Medak District, Telangana.

¶29

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶30

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent no.3 not to disturb with the petitioner's peaceful possession in respect of land admeasuring 1 Acres 28 guntas in Survey.No.773, situated at Kandi Village, Sangareddy Mandal, Medak District, Telangana on the instance of unofficial Respondents.

¶31

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P.VENUGOPAL SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI AVADESH NARAYAN SANGHI

¶32

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: AGP FOR HOME

¶33

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 to 12i------

¶34

The Court made the follorving: ORDER

¶35

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶36

WRIT PETITION NO. 1485O of 2O2O

¶37

ORDER:

¶38

Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.

¶39

This writ petition is liled alleging that the third respondent/ Station House Officer, Sanga Reddy Rural is intcrfering in civil disputes and compelling petitioners for settlement of disputes u,ith unoflicial respondents in respect of land admeasuring Ac.1.28 guntas ir-r Survev No. 773, Kandi village, Sanga Reddy mandal, Medak disrrict.

¶40

Learned senior counsel Sri P Venugopal, apytt'aring lor lezrr:red counsel for petitior-rers on record, lairly submits th.t i .l dccrcc r.t'as passed against petitioners in O S No. 337 of 2006 in thr Cor-rrt of learrned Senior Civil Judge, Sanga Reddy and aggrievcd thcrcbt', petil ione rs prefcrred appeal in A S No. 81 of 2018 and thc same is perrcling consideration in the Court of Principal Distri( t Judgc, Sangareddy at Medak. Learned senior counsel, therefore submits that police cannot interfere in civil disputes.

¶41

According to learned Assistant Government Pieader on 30tr. August, 2020, based on a complaint of Mr Afroz Mohammed/ supervisor of first petitioner Crime No. 216 o{ 2020 was registered against 4th respondent and others on the allegation that thcv arc interfering with the possession and enjoyment of the subje('r propert] and have used filthy language against the complainant. On 3 l'' ALtgust, 2020 another complaint u'as lodged by 4tr' respondent rvith similar zrllegations against petitioners and others and same is nurtbcrcd zts Crime No. 222 of 2O2O in the same police station. Lcarnecl Assistatrt Government Pleader submits that except lor registration of c:rime, no lurther steps are taken by the police and police are not invoh, irrg in civil

¶42

disputes. According to learned Assistant Government Pleader, once crime is registered, it is bounded duty ol the^police to^{investigateand} except invcstigation into the alleged crimes^{there is no questionof police} interfering in civil disputes.

¶43

Thc written instructions furnished to the Government Pleader for Home by the Sub Inspector of Police, Sangareddv Rural Police Station dated 7.9.2020 are placed on record. The relevant portion of ihc instructions, read as under:

¶44

"lt is humbly submitted that except registration of the above cases and conducting the investigation into the above mentioned crimes in accordance with law', this respondent poiice never involved the civil disputes as alleged. At any point of time, this respondent police never asked the petitioners to settle the matter \ ''ith the unofficial respondents herein. It is further humbly submitted that mere rcgistration of criminal cases against each other and proceeding with the investigation into the same as prescribed by law, it does not mean, this respondent police are interfering with civil disputes."

¶45

It is needless to observe that the role of the police is only tr-r investigate into the crime and take appropriate action thereon but thev cannot involve in civil disputes. The statement of Sub lnspector of Policc, Szrngareddy Rural Police Station would amply demonstrate that policc arr: not intcrfering in the civil dispute between the petitioners ancl unoflicial respondents. In vieu, thereof, the apprehension of the petitioners that police are interfering in civil disputes, does not subsist anv morc. Hor.l,cver, if the petitioners have any grievance r.l,ith relerencc to anl' othcr issue interse petitioners and re spondents / others, it is open for them to workout remedies available to them in law.

¶46

Subject to above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, stand closed.

¶47

SD/. N.CHANDRA^SEKH RAO ASSISTANT^R ISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

¶48

To, 1. The Home Secretary, State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶49

The Superintendent of Police, Sanga^{Reddy District.}

¶50

The Station House Officer, Sanga^{Reddy Rural}

¶51

One CC to Sri Avadesh r'laravai Sanghi,^Advocate IOPUC]

¶52

Two CCs to GP for Home, Hilh Court^{for the State of Telangana} at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶53

Two CD Copies sma.s}-

¶54

HIGH COURT

¶55

DATED:0710912020

¶56

rtc S T4
o
,J 1 4 SE P 2m0 q
*
jDAl

ORDER

WP.No.14850 of 2020

DISPOSING OF THE WP

WITHOUT COSTS

)(\l :-

Sri. Khatighar Shankar Rao and 5 others v. The State of Telangana and 11 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Khatighar Shankar Rao and 5 others v. The State of Telangana and 11 others

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

Ch.Ramulu Vs The State of Telangana and 2 others

Saluvadi Sumalatha Vs The Telengana Residential Educational Institutions Recruitment Boardd(Trei-Rb) and Another

M. Murali Chary Vs Addl. Registrar Services

E.Prabhakar Vs The State of Telangana and another

Jaggampudi Kiran Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

M Anjaiah Vs the State of Tg