Disposed

M.Venkata Ranga Prasad, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC27 Aug 2021WP/33960/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 151 CPC regarding alleged police interference in a civil dispute. The Court observed that the police authority had submitted a final report stating the matter was civil in nature and refrained from interference, leading to the disposal of the petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of recording that the police did not interfere. No order as to costs.

M.Venkata Ranga Prasad, Vs The State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶2

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO: 33960 OF 2016

¶6

Between:

¶7

M.Venkata Ranga Prasad, S/o. Venkata Nageshwar Rao, Aged: 55^{years, Occ:} Business, R/o.D.No.60-3-23, Coastal Building, Ashok Nagar,^{Vijayawada,Krishna} District.

¶8

...PETITIONER

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana,^{Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Home,} Secretariat Building, Hyderabad

¶11

Director General oi Poiice^{(DGP),State of Telangana,Hyderabad.}

¶12

Deputy lnspector General^{df Police (DlG), Warangal, WarangalDistrict,} Telangana

¶13

The Siation House Officer,^{Aswapuram Police Station, Aswapuram, Khammam} District

¶14

Mr. Sambi Raju, lnspector^{of Police, Aswapuram Police Station' Aswapuram,} Khammam District

¶15

...RESP.NDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 of^{the constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances statedⁱⁿ the^{affidavitfiled therewith, the HighCourt may be pleased to} issue a writ or order or direction^{more particularly one in the natureof Writ of} Mandamus declaring the^{highhandedaction of the Respondent No.S, withoutany} basis or authority, as^{illegal,arbitrary and violativeof Articles 14, 19 and 2'1 of the} Constitution of lndia and^{aparl from being violative of principlesof natural justice} PMP. NO: 1 70F20

¶17

Petition under Section 151^{CPC prayingthat in the circumstances stated in the} affidavit filed in support^{of the petition,the High Court maybe pleased to directthe} respondents not to interfere^{with the personal life and liberty of the petitioner, pending} final disposal of the main^{writ petition.}

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner:^{SRl. VENKATA RANGADAS KANURI}

¶19

Counsel forthe Respondent^{Nos.1to 4: GP FOR HOME}

¶20

Counsel forthe Respondent^{No.5: NONEAPPEARED}

¶21

The Court made the fotlowing:^ORDER

¶22

I]ON'BLIT Szu JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI

¶23

W.P.No.33960 of 2016

¶24

ORI)ER:

¶25

I . When the matter is taken up lor hearing, leamed counsel for the petitioner contended that respondent No.4 is trying to interfere with the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.5. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is fited.

¶26

Learned Govemment^pleader for Home appearing lbr the respondents contended that initially a complaint was registered against the petitioner and respondent No.4 has investigated the said case and after investigation. it has come to notice of respondent No.4 that the dispute is of civil in naturc and accordingly, final report was submitted on 06.9.2016 stating that the said crime is 'civil in nature' and that respondent No.4 wou.ld not intel'f'ere with the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.5.

¶27

In view of the above submission of learned Govemment pleader, this court is of the considered view that this writ petition can be disposed of recording the submission of the learned Government pleader that respondent No.4 is not interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.5.

¶28

4 With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs

¶29

Misocllaneous^petitions pending. ilany, shall stand clismissed.

¶30

To,

¶31

SD/. N.CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO AsslsrANT RERISIRAR 'TRUE^coPY// sECloN bYi,..*

¶32

1 House Officer, Aswapuram potice Station, Aswapuram, Khammam I[ir:.|r,'"" 23 One CC to to Sri Venkata GP ror Home, High Ralgapa^s Cour Kanuri, Advocate [OpUC]f;;6;3i;ru=o'f"r"rrn6rn, at Hyderabad. ,rd;r?". 4 Two CD Copies 5 One Spare Copy CHR DDN

*_--

HIGH COURT

DATED:2710812021

ORDER

W.P.No.33960 of 2016

1 HE S IAT
6
a-
Jo
(.) 1 7 SEP202I e
?+* *
oF3P,iT

¶39

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS.

¶40

%,^ (3)

M.Venkata Ranga Prasad, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Venkata Ranga Prasad, 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Siva Sai Agencies Vs The Food Corporation of India and Another

Bokka Sree Rama Krishna Vs The State of Telangana

M/ s Lakshmi Narasimha Warehousing Partnership Vs Union of India

Mittapally Govardhan Vs Sri G. Srinivasa Rao

Nenavath Devender Vs The State of Telangana

K.Shalini Vs State of Telangana