Disposed

Ponnam Sunitha v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Jan 2024WP/186/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the police's inaction on a complaint regarding a deceased member's estate and their alleged coercion of the family to settle accounts. The court directed the police to refrain from interfering in the civil dispute.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent No.5 not to interfere with the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent Nos.6 to 9 in any manner except in accordance with law.

Ponnam Sunitha Vs The State of Telangana — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

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

¶3

THU DAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY Tt/VO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON URABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 186 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Ponnam Sunith Wo Late Ponnarn Mohan Kumar, Aged about 44^yea$, Occ. Housewife, Ri/o. H.No. 11-3-6641320, Sanjeevapuram Colony, Parsigutta, Secunderabad

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

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

¶12

The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City^{Road No.12, BanjaraHills,} Hyderabad. I

¶13

The Deputy Corhmissioner of Police,^{EastZone,PoliceColony'Amberpet,} Hyderabad. I

¶14

The Assistant Commissioner of^{Police, Chilkalguda Division, Chilkalguda'} Secunderabad. t

¶15

The Station Hou$e Officer, Police Station,^{Warasiguda, Secunderabad.}

¶16

Mr.N. Mallikarjuh, Sub lnspector of^{Police, Police Station, Warasiguda,} Secunderabad. I

¶17

Koivi Surenderf S/o K. Narsimha Aged about 45^{years, Occ. Business,} R/o.H.No.1 1-3-664/239 Sanieevapuram,^{Parsigufta, Secunderabad}

¶18

Pulla Srinivas, S/o P. Eshw-araiah,^{Aged major, Occ. Business, Rl/o.H.No.1'l-} 3-735, New Ashdk Nagar, Parsigufta,^Secunderabad

¶19

P.Upender, S/o P. Narayana,^{Aged major,Occ. Business,Fi/o. H.No. 11-3-} 6641237 , NewAshok Nagar, Parsigutta,^Secunderabad

¶20

| .-.RESPONDENTS

¶21

Petition under Adicle 226 of the Constitution^{of lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated Ilin the affidavit^{filed therewith, the High Court maybe} pleased to issue an a[propriate writ, I order or direction more^{particularly one in} the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring^{the illegal actsof the respondent police} especially respondentl No.S in^{not taking any actionon the complaint of the} petitioner daled 14t12i2023 I and pressurizing the^{petitionerto settlethe dispute in} the police station with ihe unof1cial^{respondents 7 to 9 as arbitrary, illegal and in} violation of Articles 14land 21of the^{Constitutionof lndia and consequentlydirect} the respondent^police lo I consider the^{complaintof the petitioner dated1411212023}

¶22

1A NO: 1 OF 2024

¶23

Petition under Section 151 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 2nd respondent to take action against the 6th respondent for his illegal acts in the^premises of the 5th respondent police station

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI V. VEDA VIKAS

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to5: GP FOR HOME

¶26

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6to9: None Appeared

¶27

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶28

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

¶29

WRIT PETITION No.186 OF 2o24

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

This Writ Petition, under^{Article 226 ofthe}

¶32

Constitution of India,^{is frled seeking to declarethe action of} respondent No.S in^{not taking any action on the complaint} of the petitioner,^{dated 14.12.2023 and pressurizingthe} petitioner to settle the^{dispute in the police station with} respondent Nos.7 to^{9, asarbitrary,illegal and} consequently to direct^{the respondent-police to considerthe} complaint of^{the petitioner, dated 14-12.2023.}

¶33

Heard learned^{counsel for the petitioner,Iearned} Assistant Government^{Pleader for Homeappearing for the} respondent^{Nos. 1 to 5 and perused the record'}

¶34

The case of the petitioner^{is that she filed a} written complaint,^{dated, 14.t2.2O23, before respondent} No.5 against respondent^{Nos.6 to 9.It is the case of the} petitioner that her husband^{is a Memberin Sanjeevani} Podupu and Mutual Fund^{Society,which is a Cooperative} *^{Society, registeredunder the provisionsof the Telangana} "-,

¶35

¶36

Cooperative Societies Act, 1964. It is further case of the petitioner that her husband expired on 21.10.2023 and after his death, the other Members in the society i.e., respondent Nos.6 to 9 forcing the petitioner to setfle the accounts of the said society by paying amount, as demanded by them. Stating said facts, the petitioner submitted the aforesaid complaint.

¶37

4 . The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.5, instead of taking action on the complaint, dated 14.12.2023 lodged by her, is frequently summoning her to the police station and forcing her to enter into settlement with respondent Nos.6 to 9 as per^'the terms dictated by them.

¶38

l,earned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the respondent_police are not having aly power or authority to interfere with the finalce disputes between the petitioner and respondent Nos.6 to 9 and the said action on the part of respondent_police amounts to violation of fundamental rights guaralteed under ArLicle 21 of the Constitution of India.

¶39

¶40

l,e arned Assistant Government Pleader for

¶41

Home, on instructions, would submit that acting on^the complaint of the petitioner, dated 14.12.2023, respondent No.5 made G.D entry and except conducting investigation into the said complaint, dated 14.12.2023,^respondent No.S is not interfering with the civil disputes^{between the} petitioner and respondent Nos.6 to 9 in arly manner.

¶42

In 'riew of the said submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.5^{not to} interfere with the ciuil disputes^{between the petitionerarld} respondent Nos.6 to 9, in any manner,^{except in} accordance with law. There^{shall be no order as tb costs}

¶43

Miscellaneous petitions if any, pending in this^Writ

¶44

Petition shall stand closed.

¶45

SD/.MOHD.ISMAIL ASSISTANT RE ISTRAR

¶46

//TRUE COPYII

¶47

sEcTroN o FICER

¶48

To, 1. The Principal Secretary Home Department, Secretariat, T.S.,Hyderabad. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad .City Road^{No.12, BanjaraHills,} Hyderabad.

¶49

The Deputy Commissioner of^{Police, East Zone, Police Colony, Amberpet,} Hyderabad.

¶50

The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Chilkalguda^{Division, Chilkalguda,} Secunderabad.

¶51

The Station House Officer,^{Police Station, Warasiguda, Secunderabad.}

¶52

Two CCs to GP FOR^HOME ,High^{Court for the State of Telangana,at} Hyderabad [OUT]

¶53

One CC to SRl. V. VEDA VIKAS, Advocate [OPUC]

¶54

B. Two CD Copies BM GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:0410112024

ORDER

WP.No.186 of 2024

o f T EL4
G
a't-
,. .,s
..L"
o *c
UJ
o
\ O
H9!H *.

¶61

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETTTION WITHOUT COSTS

¶62

G|i,>
aa-

Ponnam Sunitha v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ponnam Sunitha 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

Bonakurthi Sanjay and 2 others Vs State of Telangana and 7 others

P. Ramapoola Devi, Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

Mahboob Ali, Vs Director, Sainik Welfare

Bairu Rama Devi Vs The State of Telangana

Donkani Sarvaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Mahmood Bin Ali Yamani Vs The Station House Officer