Disposed

N. Madan Mohan Reddy v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC16 Nov 2023WP/23317/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a Writ Petition and inspection petition filed by a petitioner alleging police harassment and failure to investigate his complaint. The court observed that charge sheets had already been laid and it deemed appropriate to direct the petitioner to approach the Magistrate for necessary documents to prosecute his case effectively rather than adjudicating the writ plea on meri

What did the court decide?

Director to file an application before the concerned Magistrate for necessary documents to enable effective prosecution of the case. The writ petition was dismissed and no costs awarded.

N. Madan Mohan Reddy Vs State of Telangana — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY, THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

wRrT PETIT|ON NO.23317 0F 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

N. Madan Mohan Reddy, S/o Koti Reddy, Aged 60 Years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o. Plot No.24, Lal Bahadur Colony, Thirumulgherry, Secunderabad 500 015, Telangana State.

¶9

..,PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The Station House Officer, Mavala Police Station, Adilabad District.

¶13

Erram Vanaja, Wo Ramana Reddy, Aged about 38 Years, Occ. Household, Rl/o Mavala Village, Adilabad Mandal, Adilabad District -504 001, T.S.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 ol the 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 Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 Police Authorities in frequently calling the Petitioner to come to the Police Station to settle the issue with the Respondent No.3 and withdraw the case vide FIR No.l50/2023, dated 1610812023.on the file of PS. Jaipur, Mancherial District. registered against the Respondent No.3; as unjust, illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, violative of settled principles of law and also in violation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia, and consequently direct

¶16

the Respondent No.2 Police Authorities to not harass the pe tioner except in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the law.

¶17

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

¶18

Petition under section 151 cPC praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.2 Police Authorities to not threaten the petitioner to come to the Police Station to settle the issue with the Respondent No.3 and withdraw the case vide FIR No.150/2023, dated 1610812023 on the file of pS. Jaipur, ltrlancherial District, registered against the Respondent No.3, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G. VENKAT REDDY

¶20

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: AGP FOR HOME

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: -

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

I I

¶24

I l

¶25

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶26

WRIT PETITION No.23317 OF 2o23

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:

¶29

". . . . . . .to tssue an appropiate Wit, Order or direction, more particalarlg one in the nature of Wit of Mandamus, declaing the oction of the Respondent No.2 Police Authoities in freqtentlg^{colling the Petitioner to come to the Police Stotion} to settle the issue uith Respondent No.3 and. uithdrau-t the case uide FIR No.15O/2023, dated 16.08.2023 on the file of P.S. Jaipur, Mancheial Distict, registered against Respond.ent .lVo.3 as unjus| illegal, arbitrary, uiolatiue of pinciples of naturol justice, uiolatiue of settled pinciples of lana and also in uiolation of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of Indta, ond consequentlA direct the Respondent No.2 Police Authorities to not harass the Petitioner except in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the law, and pass such other relief. . .."

¶30

2 It is the case of the petitioner that he has lodged a

¶31

complaint against respondent No.3 and respondent No.2 has registered a case in Crime No.150 of 2023, dated 16.08.2023 for the offence punishable under Section 380 IPC. It is the further case of the petitioner that as a counterblast to the case flled by him, respondent No.3 has lodged a complaint against him. The grievance of the petitioner is that at the instigation of respondent No.3, respondent No.2 is frequently summoning him to the police station, forcing him to enter into a settlement with respondent No.3 and to withdraw the case in FIR No.150 of 2023 hled by him ald further, the

¶32

¶33

¶34

respondents-police are not acting upon the complaint lodged by him and proceeding further with the investigation.

¶35

l,earned Assistant Government pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. I and 2 has submitted that aJter conducting investigation in both the complaints filed by the petitioner and respondent No.3, the resltonrlents-police have laid charge sheets before the concerned Courts and the sarrre are numbered as C.C.Nos. 15O ancl I of 2023 respectively.

¶36

In view. of the above submissions, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the Writ petition directing the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the concerned Magistrate for supply of necessar5r documents to enable him to prosecute his case effectively.

¶37

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

¶38

As a sequel, miscellaleous petitions pending, if aly, shall stand closed.

¶39

SD/. K. AMMAJI ASSISTANT^REGIST.RAR '{tL'//TRUE COPY// SECTION^OFFICER

¶40

To, 1 The Princioal Secretary,^{HomeDepartment,Stateof Telangana' Dr. B.R.} ili;dli;;b;creiariatBuildinss,Hvderabad' .. 2 The Station House^{Ofticei]rr'ri'ii"ioii""Station'Ad.ilabad District'} 3 o;"., Ee6'snj t]vExrnr^{REDDY, Advocate[oPUCl} 4 rwo ccs to^{GP for H;;;:"H;sl-i'bi'ir.t-ioitn" State of Telansanaat} Hyderabad [OUT] (. Two^{CD CoPies}

MP GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:1611112023

\l 1tr E S T41 6
( o
C
1 I 0Er 2C23
i,'
J
i)
ORDER

¶45

WP.No.23317 of 2023

¶46

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶47

I
II <br>)(- -:>

N. Madan Mohan Reddy v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N. Madan Mohan Reddy v. 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

Kurella Sharadamba Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Santhapuram Anil Kumar, Vs The State of Telangana

G. Santosh, Vs The State of Telangana

Ganapavarapu Sharada Vs Guttikonda Vijay

Kelavath Sree Rama Naik, Vs The State of Telangana

Panduga Shiva Shankar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana