Disposed

Akkem Mallesh Yadav v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Nov 2023WP/22276/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging police interference in a pending civil suit involving property possession. The Court directed police to not interfere with civil rights pending adjudication but to follow due procedure if presence is needed for criminal investigation.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent No.4 not to interfere with the civil rights of the petitioner pending adjudication of O.S.No.85 of 2023; directed police to follow due procedure if petitioner's presence is require

Akkem Mallesh Yadav Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32s6 ]

¶2

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

¶3

SATURDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C,V.^BHASKARREDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 22276 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Akkem Mallesh Yadav, S/o Akkem^{An.iaiah,Aged 43 years,Occ. Business,} R/o H.No.8-1-12, Mailardevpally, Udemgadda,^{Ralendranagar Mandal, Ranga} Reddy District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

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

¶12

2 The Superintendent of Police, Ranga^{ReddyDistrict.}

¶13

J The Addl.Commissioner of Police,^{Cyberabad Police.}

¶14

4 The Station House Officer, Mailardevpally^{Police Station, Ranga ReddyDist.}

¶15

5 C.Mutyalu Bai, W/o Venkatesham,^{Aged about 67 years,Occ. Household,Rl/o} H.No.i3-2-26814, Shivlal Nagar, Rahimpura,^Hyderabad.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the^{Constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filedtherewith,the High Court may be} pleased to issue a writ order or direction more^{particularly one in the nature of} writ of Mandamus, declaring the action^{of Respondent No.4 police in interfering} with the personal life and liberty and civil disputes^{and threatening the petitioner} by calling him to the Police^{station and thereby further threatening to handover} the possession of house vide^{H.No.B-12-94OlP} '^{Sy No.156/2,admeasuring} 125Sq.Yards, situated at Sai Colony,^{Mailardevpallyvillage, GHMCRajendra} Nagar Circle, Ranga Reddy district^{is highly lllegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction} and violation of Articles 14,^{15,21and 3004 of constitutionof lndia and also} violation of^principlles of Natural Justice^{and consequently direct the respondent} No-4 to not to interfere with the^{personal life and liberty of the petitioner and not} to threaten him to handover^{his house to respondentNo.5.}

¶18

lA NO:^'l OF 2023

¶19

Petition under Section^'1 51 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 4th Respondent not to call Petitioner to the office/police station of the Respondent No.4 with regard to the civil dispute^pending before the court of law in respect of house vide H. No.8- 1 2-940/P, Sy No.156/2, admeasuring 125Sq.Yards, situated at Sai Colony, Mailardevpally village, GHMC Rajendra Nagar Circle, Ranga Reddy district,^pending disposal of the above writ^petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI USAKOYEELA CHANDRASHEKAR

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent No. 1 to 4: GP FOR HOME

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.5: - - - -

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{C.V. BHASKAR R.EDDY}

¶25

WRIT PETITIO N No.22276^{of 2o23}

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

This writ petition^is filed^{seeking the followingrelief:}

¶28

". . . . . . .1o issue a u.trit, order or^{direction, more particularlyone} in the nature of Writ of^{Mandamuqdeclaingthe actionof} Respondent No.4^{poticein interferinguith the personal ltfe} and libertg and ciuit disputes^{andthreatening the petitioner} by calling him to the^{Police stationond therebg} further threatening to handouer^{tlrc possessionof house uide H'No'8-} 12-g4O/P, Sg.No.156/2,^{admeasuing125} &' Yards, situated at Sai Colong,^{Moilardeupallg Villoge,GHMC'} Rajenclro Nagar Circle,^{RangctReddyDistict, is highlg} iltegal, arbitrary,^{uithout juisdictton and uiolation of Articles} 14, 15, 21 and 30OA of^{Constitution of India andalso} uiolation of pinciptes^{of Natural Justiceand consequently} direct respondent No.4^{to not to interfereuith the personal} Life and libertg of^{the petitioner and not to threatenhimto} hond ouer his house to^{respondentNo 5 andpass such other} relief.^. .. "

¶29

The petitioner claims^{to be the owner and possessorof} house bearing Municipal^{No.8-12-940/P,Sy'No'156 12,} admeasuring 125 square^{yards,situated atSai Colony,} Mailardevpally Village,^{GHMC RajendranagarCircle, Ranga} Reddy, having acquired^{the same by virtue of Registered} Agreement-cum-General^{Power of Attorney bearing document} No.l27Ol2O2O, dated^{LO.O2.2O2O-It is the case of the} petitioner that his^{GPA Holder uiz., Amar Chand Prajapatihas} purchased the^{said house propertyby way of registeredsale} deed bearing'document^{No.611 of 2019, dated 21'O1'2Ol9lt}

¶30

¶31

is the further case of the petitioner that when respondent No.5 is interfering with his possession over the said house property, he was constrained to institute a civil suit uide O.S.No.8S of 2023 on the file of the Court of the Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-Xl Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Rajendranagar. The grievance of the petitioner is that pending adjudication of O.S.No.85 of 2023, at the instance of respondent No.5, respondent No.4 is frequently summoning him to the police station, confining him for hours together and forcing him to enter into a settlement with respondent No.5 as per the terms dictated by her

¶32

l,earned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appeanng 1br respondent Nos.7 to 4 has submitted that actin€ on the complaint todged by respondent No.5, a case in Crime No. 53 2 of 2023 , was registered against the petitioner for the offences punishabie under Sectio ns 42O,468,471 and 506 IPC and only for the purpose of investigation, the respondents-police have summoned the petitioner to the police station, but they are not interfering with the civil disputes pencling between the petitioner and respondent No.5 in O.S.No.85 of 2023, in any manner.

¶33

¶34

t I

¶35

In view of the said submissions, this Court, deems it appropriate to dispose ol the writ petition, directing respondent No.4 not to interfere with the civil rights of the petitioner in any manner, pending adjudication of O.S.No.85 of 2023 and if the presence of the petitioner is required for the purpose of investigation in Crime No.532 of 2023, the respondents-police are directed to follow due procedure contemplated under law.

¶36

5, With the above observation, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶37

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,

¶38

shall stand closed.

¶39

SD/. K. AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPYII

¶40

S ECTION OFFICER

¶41

To,

¶42

The Principal Secretarv, Home Department, The State of Telangana, Secretariat, Hyderabad ! lfe^{pqqerintehdentof potice, Ranga} Reddv District.

¶43

! lfe {ool^{commissioner of pbtic;,tib;;#";'F;i"".}

¶44

The station House officer,r/airaraeviriily Fon-"e"siation, Ranga Reddv Dist. 5. one CC to SRt USAKoYE_E_LA cnn'llodn's-nEkin, nouo.l6ioi,Ucl ",". 9 IWB 33tS,gj FoR HoME, Hign Courtioiih;sLi'" "?i;r"i,,sl;;Ir6urj BN

GJP

,-$(

HIGH COURT

DATED:1811112023

ORDER

WP.No.22276 oI 2023

1 etE STAT t
(
o
d 15 oEr zo23
.f'
t
oE:-: pr:j

¶52

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶53

iz)
1il. -

Akkem Mallesh Yadav v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akkem Mallesh Yadav 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

Mohammed Faisal Ahmed, Vs the State of Telangana

Zakir Hussain Siddiqui, Vs The State of Telangana

Kavati Chandra Shekar Yadav Vs The State of Telangana

Karne Ravi Vs The State of Telangana

Vaddevalli Lalitha Saran Kumar Vs Union of India

Boda Prakash Vs The State of Telangana