Disposed

Amer Khan, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC3 Jan 2024WP/15/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court directed police to follow Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and prevent summoning the petitioner without registering a case, citing Antesh Kumar guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to follow Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and not summon petitioner without crime registration under Antesh Kumar guidelines.

What the court decided

Amer Khan, Vs The State of Telangana — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

TI-TE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.^{BHASKAR REDOY}

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:'15 OF 2024

¶7

B€tween:

¶8

Amer Khan, S/o. Hameed Khan, aged about. 28^{years, Occ} ;^{Business/Driver,} Ft/o.H.No.10-13-144t2581N1 , Sagar Hills Colony,^{Near Masjide Qamar,Nizamabad,} Nizamabad District, T.S.

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

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

¶12

The Director General of Police, Telangana^{State, Hyderabad.}

¶13

The Commissioner of Police, Jagithyal,^{JagithyalDistrict, T.S.}

¶14

The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Jagithyal,^{JagithyalDistrict,T.S}

¶15

The Station House Officer, Jagithyal^{Town, Jagithyal Districl, T.S.}

¶16

Natesh Goud, S/o. Not Known to^{the petitioner, aged about. 35 years, Occ.} Circle lnspector of Police, Jagithyal^{Town, Jagithyal District, T S-}

¶17

Marripelly Pavan Kalyan, S/o. Gangadhar,^{aged about. 37 yearslH.induby} Religion,-Occ. business, R/o. H. No.3-249,^{lslampur, Govindpalli, Jagithyal} District,T. S.

¶18

.....RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition Under Article 226 of lhe Constitution^{of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed^{therewith,the High Court may be} pleased to issue any appropriate writ, order or directions^{more in the nature of} Wirt of Mandamus for declaring^{inaction on the part of the respondent No.5and 6} interfere in personal life of the^{petitioner in day to day life and trying to foisted} false case against the^petitioner at the^{instructionof the respondent Nos 7 and} the respondent No.6 by using his official^{powers and forced to obtainedthe}

¶20

signature of the petitioher on created a document so called PABANDI PATHRAM in favor of the respondent No.7 is highly atbitraty, unconstitutional, bad in law and illegal and against the provision of article 14 and 21 of Constitution of lndia and against the principles of natural justice AND direct the respondent No.5 and 6 not to interfere in personal life of the petitioner in day to day life and not to threaten come to police station as on the instruction of the respondent No.7. I.A.NO:1 OF 2024

¶21

Petition Under Section^'t 51 CPC praylng that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to interim directions to the respondent No.5 and 6 not to interfere in personal life of the petitioner in day to day tife and not to threaten come to Jagithyal police station as on the instruction of the respondent No.7.

¶22

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI G.DINESH PATIL

¶23

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to 5 : AGP FOR HOME

¶24

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 & 7 : --

¶25

The Court made the following ORDER

¶26

HON'BLE SRI WSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶27

WRIT PETITION No.15 of 2o24

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliel"...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandam us declaring the inaction of the 3'd respondent in not registering the FIR basing on the petitioner's complaint, dated 25.I1.2023 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and in violation of verdict of the Hon'ble Apex Court and consequently direct the 3.a respondent to register the FIR basing on the petitioner's complaint dated 25.11.2023 and to pass..."

¶30

The case of the petitioner.is that respondent Nos.4 and 5 rvithout registering any case against him, are frequcntl-y summoning him at the instance of respondent Nos.6 and 7 and forcing him to enter into a settlement u,ith respondent Nos.6 and 7 as per the terms dictated by them. [t is the further case of the petitioner that the petitioner entered into an agreement, dated 10.07.2O23, 'uvith^{respondentNos.6and 7 for disposalof his vehicle i.e.,}

¶31

¶32

CVBR, J wp_15_2024

¶33

Swift Dzire Car bearing No.TS 21 D 4103 and as

¶34

respondent Nos.6 and 7 h.ave not complied with the certain conditions of the said agreement, he has not registered the said vehicle in favour of the subsequent purchasers. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent Nos.6 and 7 instead of taking recourse by approaching the competent civil Court, have instigated respondent Nos.4 and 5 to settle the disputes pending between the petitioner and respondent Nos.6 and 7

¶35

karned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 5 has submitted that respondent Nos.6 and 7 have lodged a complaint against t-I.e petitioner and lor the purpose of investigation, the petitioner was summoned to the police station ald the police never interfered w,ith the civil rights of the petitioner ln any manner.

¶36

In view of the above submissions, this Court, deems it appropriate to dispose of the r.r,rit petition directing respondent Nos-4 and 5 to lollorv the procedure

¶37

¶38

CVBR. J Wp_15_2024

¶39

contemplated under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. and^the grridelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Antesh Kumar Vs. State of Biharl, if the presence of the petitioner is required for the purpose of investigation in any crime. It is made clear that without registration^{of any} crime, respondent Nos.4 and 5 shall not summon^the petitioner to the police station for any^purpose.

¶40