Disposed

Bura Janakiram, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC5 Oct 2023WP/23705/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought writ of mandamus restraining police from summoning him and interfering in a civil dispute over agricultural land pending before the Government Agent, alleging interference. Court disposed summarily based on respondent's explanation of procedural necessity for investigation.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No.3 not to interfere with the civil dispute between parties except in accordance with law when presence is required for investigation.

Bura Janakiram, Vs The State of Telangana — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATEOF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD} (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

THURSDAY. THE FIFTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{C.V. BHASKAR REDDY}

¶6

WRIT PETITIO N NO: 23705^{OF 2023}

¶7

Between:

¶8

Bura Janakiram, S/o Narayana^{Aged51 years occ. Business,Rl/o'} H.No.6-6-60, Netaii Market,^{Chinna Bazar'Kothagudem.}

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana,^{rep by Principal Secretary(Home), Secretariat,} Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The Superintendent of Police,^{Bhadradri Kolhagudem District, Kothagudem.}

¶13

3 The Station House Officer,^PS Tekulapally,^{Bhadradri Kothagudem District}

¶14

4 Tholem Mallaiah, S/o Late^{Lingaiah, aged 57 years,Occ: Cultivation,Rl/o.} Kuntalla Village, Bhadru ThandS,^{Tekulapalli Mandal, BhadradriKothagudem} District.

¶15

(CT-R4 amended as^per C.O. dt.^{0511012023in !.A.No'2ot 20231}

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 of the^{constitutionof lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be} pleased to pass an order or direction or^{writ in the nature of Mandamus duly} declaring the interference^{of the 3rd respondent in the civil dispute in respect of} agricultural land to^{an extent of aboutAcers 4-20 guntas situated in survey} nUmber 17ol12lAA4, at^{Kuntalla Village,BethampudiRevenueVillage'} Tekulapally Mandal, Bhadradri.^{Kothagudem,despite the civil suit pending on the} file of Honourable^{Agent to Government (District collector)at Bhadradri} Kothagudem vide oS^{No. 55 of 2021 , as illegal, arbitrary and highhandedness} and consequently, direct^{the 3rd respondent not the call the petitioner to the} police station and not to interfere^{with the civil disputeon the above subject} malter in the interest^{of justice-}

¶18

l I I I

¶19

lA NO: 1 oF 2023

¶20

Petition under section i 51 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petrtion, the High court may be preased to direct the respondents not the ca, the petrtioner to the porice station and not to interfere with the civir dispute in respect of agricurturar rand to an extent of about Acers 4-20 guntas situated in survey number 170/ 12rAA4, at Kuntara Virage, Eethampudi Revenue Village, Tekulapally lr,,4andal, Bhadradri Kothagudem, which is a subject matter in civil suit pending on the file of Hon,ble Agent to Government (District corector) at Bhadradri Kothagudem vide os No.55 0f 2021 , in the interest of justice.

¶21

Counsel for the petitioner: SRt p.RAMA SHARANA SHARMA

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 3: Gp FOR HOME

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.4: __

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

¶26

THE HON'BLE SRI^{JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY}

¶27

WRIT P ETITION NO.2 3705 of^2(J23

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

This Writ Petition, under Afticle^{226 of the Constitution of} India, is filed by^{the petitioner,seekingthe following relief:}

¶30

"...to^pass an order or^{direction or Nrit in the natureof Mandamus} duly dectaring the interference^{of the 3'd respondentin the civil} dispute in respect of agricultural^{land to an extentof aboutAcers 4-} 20 guntas situated in Survey^{number170/12/AA4,atKuntalla} Village, Eethampudi^{RevenueVillage, Tekulapally Mandal,Bhadradri-} Kothagudem, desptte the^{ctvilsuit pending on the fileof Honourable} Agent^(District Collector)^to at^{GovernmentBhadradri-Kothagudem} vide OS No.55 of 2021,^{as tltegal,arbttrarY andhighhandedness and} consequently, direct the^{3''1 respondentnot the call the petitionerto} the police station and^{not to interferewiththe civildispute on the} above subject matter^{in the interest of justice.. ."}

¶31

It is the case of^{the petitioner that he is the peaceful} possessor of the agricultural land^{to an extent of about Acers4'20} guntas situated in Sy.No.L7Ol12/AA4,^{atKuntalla Village,} Bethampudi Revenue^{Village, TekulapallyMandal, Bhadradri-} Kothagudem. The^{respondentNo.4 has filed a civil suit vide} O.S.No.55 of 2O2l^{on the file of Agent of Government (District} Collector), at^{Bhadradri Kothagudem, seeking declarationof his} title as well as^{rectiFicationof entries in the revenue records' It is} furthercaseofthepetitionerthatpendingadjudicationoftheSaid

)

suit, at the instigation oF respondent No.4, the respondent No.3 is frequently summoning the petitioner to the police station and forcing him to enter jnto setflement with respondent No.4 as per the terms dictated by him. It is further case of the petitioner that when the respondent No.3 interfered with the civil disputes, he lodged a complaint dated 16.05.2022 on the fite of respondent No.2 and even arter receipt of the said complaint, the respondent No.2 has not taken any action and therefore, the petitioner was consti-ained to file Writ petition No.16909/2023 on the File of th is Court and the said Writ petition was dismissed as withd ra wn o n 04 .07 .2023.

¶36

The learned Government pleader for Home appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 0n written instructions has submitted that acting on the complaint submitted by the petitioner, a case in Crime No.93/2023 was registered against the respondent No.4, for the offences under Sections 442 and 427 IpC. It is further submitted that only for the purpose of investigation, the petitioner and respondent No.4 were summoned to the police station and the respondents-police have not interfered with the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.4, ,n un, -.,:.Ty..=-tI

¶37

¶38

¶39

In view of the^{above submissions,this Writ Petitionis} disposed of directing^{the respondent No.3 not to interfere with the} civil disputes between^{the petitionerand respondentNo'4 in any} manner, except in^{accordance with law. If the presence of the} petitioner is required For the^{purpose of investigation, the} respondent No.3 shall^{followthe procedure, in accordancewith} law.

¶40

As a sequel, mlscellaneous^{applications pendingiF any in this} writ^petition, shall^{standclosed' No costs.}

¶41

SD/.^{MOHD.SANAULLAH- A.NSARI} ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR //rRUE coPY/, ,Ec,oN^6i.cen

¶42

to",. ,n" Station^{House officer' PSTekulapally' Bhadradri KothagudemDistrict'}

¶43

1. One^{CC to SRI P RAMA SHARANA SHARMA'Advocate IOPUCI}

¶44

a Two CCs to^{GP FOR HOME'HighCourt for the State of Telanganaat} HYderabad [OUT]

¶45

¶46

Two^{CD CoPies}

BSRM

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0511012023

ORDER

WP.No.23705 of 2023

1 ;1E STA rq
J
13 i'ilu ?0?l o

D...,.. : " '.\ r'_

¶53

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION,

¶54

WITHOUT COSTS

¶55

Bura Janakiram, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bura Janakiram, 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Erumalla Pushpa Vs The State Of Telangana

Sri Sai Ram Chemicals Vs The Station House Officer

Madaraboina Rajender Vs The State of Telangana

Jignesh Doshi Vs The State of Telangana

Islavath Shakru, Vs The State of Telangana

Annaboina Tirupathi Yadav Vs State of Telangana