Dismissed

Yeruvva Narapareddy v. The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Telangana HC17 Nov 2020WP/18743/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging interference with personal liberty by Assistant Commissioner of Police for allegedly settling land disputes. Court disposed of petition upon revelation that a crime was registered against the petitioner, recognizing police shall not involve in civil disputes.

What did the court decide?

Grants liberty to the petitioner to work out remedies as available in law against the registration of crime No. 189 of 2020.

Yeruvva Narapareddy Vs The State of Telangana and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original J urisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEIVBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 18743 OF 2020

¶7

Between:

¶8

Yeruvva Narapareddy, S/o.Brama Reddy, Aged about 63 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o H.No.5-1-174, Krishna Nagar, Somanapalle, Ramagundam, Peddapalli District' Telangana state

¶9

...pETrroNER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, rep., by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Commissioner of Police, Ramagundam Commissionerate, Ramagundam, Peddapalli District.

¶13

3 The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Ramagundam, Peddapalli District.

¶14

4 The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Godavarikhani, Peddapalli District.

¶15

5 Station House Officer, NTPC Police Station, Ramagundam, Peddapalli District

¶16

RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of lVandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.4 in interfering with the petitioners personal life and liberty and calling the petitioner to his officeand making the petitioner sit from morning till night under the guise of alleged settlement of Iand dispute as arbitrary, illegal, colorable exercise of power, abdication of statutory duty cast on them and violative of principles of natural^justice, apart from violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under articles 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondent No.4 not to interfere with the personal life and liberty of the petitioner without following due procedure

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2020

¶19

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,4 not to interfere with the personal life and liberty of the petitioner without following due procedure, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SANJEEV GILLELA

¶21

Counsel for Respondents: AGP FOR HOME

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

-2-

¶24

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.18743 of 2O2O

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

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

¶28

This u,rit petition is filed alleging that even though no crime is registered against petitioner, the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Godavarikhani is interlering with the personal life and liberty of the petitioner and calling him to his office and making him to sit from morning ti11 night with an objective of settling the land disputes by involving in civil disputes.

¶29

When the matter is taken-up for consideration, learned Assistant Government Pleader informs the Court that on 19 .1O.2O2O crime No. 189 of 2O2O was registered against the petitioner. Except investigating into the crime, police are not invoJving in civil disputes.

¶30

Having regard to the statement of learned Assistant Government Pleader, this writ petition is disposed o[, granting libertv to the petitioner to u,ork out his remedies as available in lau, against registration of crime. It is needless to observc that police sh:rll not involve in civil disputes and sl-rall follos'due process in conducting investigation into crime No.189 of 2O2O. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶31

,TRUE COPY//

¶32

SD/-K.VENKAIAH ASSISTANT REGIS R SECTION OFFICER

¶33

To, 1 The Commissioner of Police, Ramagundam^{Commissionerate, Ramagundam,} Peddapalli District.

¶34

2 The Deputy Commissioner of Police,^{Ramagundam,P^!dapalli Dis]rict} 3 The Asiistint Commissioner of Police, Godavarikhani,^{PeddapalliDistrict.} 4 The Station House Officer, NTPC Police Station,^{Ramagundam,Peddapalli} District.

¶35

One CC to Sri Sanjeev Gillela Advocate [OPUC]

¶36

1. Two CCs to GP foi Home, High Court for the State^{of Telangana (OUT)} 7. Two CD Copies

¶37

[/BC

HIGH COURT

DATED: 1711112020

.<br>1 H e S 74
(
i oo 2 8Noym z
.at'
.t
oF.S a.T \rL.

¶42

ORDER

¶43

WP.No.18743 of 2020

¶44

DlSPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶45

WITHOUT COSTS

¶46

Alfi
ti1 2o
t1

Yeruvva Narapareddy v. The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yeruvva Narapareddy v. The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rathlavath Rekya Nayak Vs The State of Telangana

Ravipati Pushpalatha,Prakasam Dist Vs S.P,Mahabubnagar,and 4

Smt. Allada Neelamma, Vs The Govt. of Ap rep.by by its Principal Secretary to Govt.

Sri Ramalayam Temple Self Style Committee Vs The State of Telangana and 4 Others

Sri Kiran Kumar Mittapalli Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Ghanshyam Das Karwa Vs The State of Telangana and 4 Others