Dismissed

Kurella Sharadamba v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC15 Nov 2023WP/18802/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposed of a writ petition challenging the police interference in a civil property dispute. The court directed the Station House Officer not to interfere with the petitioner's civil rights or summon her family regarding the suit property.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No. 6 not to interfere with the civil rights of the petitioner in any manner except in accordance with law.

Kurella Sharadamba Vs The State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32e61

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 18802 OF 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

Kurella .Sharadamba, Wo Nagabhushanam Chary, Aged about 80^years, Occ. Senior Citizen, Fl/o. H. No. 14-10413, P & T Colony, Dilshuknagar, Saroorangar Mandal, Ranga Reddy Diskict.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Prl Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Director General of Police, Telangana State at Hyderabad.

¶14

The Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda District,^Nalgonda.

¶15

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Miryalguda,^Nalgonda.

¶16

The Cl of Police, Shaligowraram Circle,^{Nalgonda District.}

¶17

The Station House Officer, Narketpally Mandal,^{Nalgonda District.}

¶18

K.Gayatri, W/o late Sriinivasa Charay, Aged about^{40 years, Occ. Housewife,} Ri/o. H.No. Raod No. 7, RTC Colony L.B. Nagar, Ranga Reddy^District.

¶19

...RESPONDENTS

¶20

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of^{lndiaprayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{the High Court maybe} pleased to issue a Writ order or direction more^particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, by declaring the action of^{the RespondentNo. 6 in interfering} into the civil disputes and calling the Petitioner^{and her sons to the police station} Narketpally and detained the Petitioner^{by illegally and interfering into the life} and liberty of the Petitioner and beating^{andthreateningto settle the handover} the house of lhe Petitioner to^{Respondent No. 7 is illegal and arbitraryand} violation of Articles 14,^{15,21 and 300-4of the Constitutionof lndia and also} violation of Principles of^{Natural Justice and consequently directthe respondent} No.6 for not to interfere into the^{life and liberty of the Petitionerand not to harass} her and his sons by colluding^{with Respondent No 7 to handoverthe Petitioner} houses to the ResPondent^{No. 7}

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶22

Petition under Sectic,n 151 CPC praying that rn the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed rn supp,ort of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.6 not to interfere rnto the life and liberty of the Petitioner and not to harass her and his sons by colluding with Respondent No. 7 to handover the Petitioner houses to the Respondent No. 7, pending disposal of the writ petition

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. RAPOLU BHASKAR

¶24

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME

¶25

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶26

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTIC EC.^{V.BHASKARREDDY}

¶27

WRIT PETIT^ION No.18802^of2023

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

The petitioner claims to^{be the owner and possessor} of a house bearing^{No.i4-104/3situatedat P&T Colony,} Saroornagar Mandal,^{Ranga Reddy District, a openplot to} an extent of^{180 square yards situated at RTCColony road} No.2, LB Nagar,^{Ranga Reddy District, another open plot} along with rooms^{to an extent of 100 squareyards situated} at Choutuppal^{Village and Mandal, and another house} situated at^{YeltankaiVitlage, Ramannapet Mandal,} Bhuvanagari-Yadadri^{District. [t is the case ofthe} petitioner that her^{name has also been mutated in the} revenue records^{in respectof the said} .properties'^{It is the} further case of the^{petitioner that her husband died in the} year 2010 and thereafter^{she brought up their childrenand} performed their marriages.^{While so, the petitioner's} second son, who is^{the husbandof respondentNo'7,} t expired irl the month^{of May,2O2i} ,^{thereafterdisputes} I \ arose between the^{petitioner and respondentNo'7 andas} per the suggestion^{of the elders in the community, certain}

¶30

¶31

\Fiffi
.. . ' :,1
'<br>

¶32

properties rvere allotted to the share of rcspondent No.7 The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.7, not being satisfied u'ith the properties given by the petitioner, is interfering .r,ith the possession ol the petitioner and also approached respondent No.6, r.t ho at the instance of respondent No.7, is frequently summoning her and other family members to police station and threatening to enter into settlement with respondent No. 7 as per the terms dictated by her.

¶33

Learned /\ssistant Government Pleader for Horne submits that a complaint was lodged by respondent No.7 against the petitioner and her famil-v memhers and after conducting prr:liminary enquiry, wherein it has been revealed that there are family disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.7, the same has been closed as civil in nat'Lrre. He further submits ttrat respondent No.6 is not surnmoning the petitioner or any of her family members to police station nor forcing them to enter into settlement witl' respondent No.7.

¶34

¶35

¶36

In view of the said submissions, the writ^petitionis

¶37

disposed of directing respondent^No.6 not to^{interfere with} the civil rights of the^{petitionerin any mannerexceptln}

¶38

accordance with law

¶39

Pending miscellaneous applications,^{ifany, shall}

¶40

stand closed. There shall be^{no orderas to costs.}

¶41

sD/-N. SRTFAR| ASSISTANT REGIqTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

sEciloN {rr,".*

To,

'1 . The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad. 2. The Director General of Police, Telangana State at Hyderabad.

¶46

The Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda District, Nalgonda.

¶47

The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Miryalguda, Nalgonda.

¶48

The Cl of Police, Shaligowraram Circle, Nalgonda District.

¶49

The Station House Officer, Narketpally Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶50

Two CCs to GP FOR HOlt/E ,High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶51

One CC to SRl. RAPOLU BHASKAR, Advocate [OPUC]

¶52

Two CD Copies BM

GJP

r$$-

HIGH COURT

DATED:1511112023

ORDER

WP.No.18802 of 2023

S { I o
$E
7Z
q C
N8
1B SET >
o
I F-rPr,1(l

¶60

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶61

.?.
arV
\

Kurella Sharadamba v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kurella Sharadamba 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

E Naresh Goud Vs The State of Telangana

V Ravi Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Dundigalla Bal Rajesham Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Santhapuram Anil Kumar, Vs The State of Telangana

G. Santosh, Vs The State of Telangana

Villa Cafe And Bristo Vs The State of Telangana