Disposed

Dasari Yadaiah v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Oct 2024WP/27648/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court closed a writ petition challenging the inaction of a police officer in registering an FIR regarding a land dispute, deeming it civil in nature. The petition was disposed of by noting the submission from the Assistant Government Pleader without passing orders on the merits and granting liberty for alternative remedies at bar.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition closed without substantive orders; liberty granted to invoke appropriate remedies.

Dasari Yadaiah Vs The State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³¹⁸³¹

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{B.VIJAYSENREDDY}

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 27648 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Dasari Yadaiah, S/o. Dasari Peddulu,^{Aged about 38 Years, Occ: Agriculture,} R/o. H- No 6- 23l^l , Dharmannaguda^{Village, Yacharam Mandal,Ranga} Reddy District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Represented^{by its. Principal Secretaryto Home} Department, TS Secretariat,^Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The Commissioner, Rachakonda^{Commissionerateat Hyderabad.}

¶13

,) The Station House Officer, Yacharam^{Police Station, Rachakonda} commissionerate, Ranga^{Reddy Diskict.}

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

' Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the^{affidavitfiled therewith, the High courtmay be} pleased to declare the action of Respondent^{No. 3 in failing to registerthe} complaint of the^petitioner dt:15-^{07' 2024 inspiteof acknowledgingthe same as} against the named accused^{in the complaintfor taking appropriateaction against} them as illegal, arbitrary,^{unconstitutional,violationfor Article 14 and 21 of} constitution of lndia and^{also contrary to the provisionsof cr P C and} consequently direct the 3'd^{respondentto forthwith register the complaint of the} petitioner dt:15- 07- 2O24 and to initiate^{action as against the named accused in} the complaint as^per the^{provisions of Cr P C/BNSSby dulyfollowingthe} guidellnes of the Hon'ble Apex court^{in the case of Lalitha Kumari V/s State of UP} which is reported in2014^{2 SCC1.}

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶17

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 3'd respondent to forthwith register the complaint of the petitioner dated 1507- 2024 and to initiate action as against the named accused, in the complaint as per the provisions of Cr P C/BNSS by duly following the guidelines of Hon'ble Apex Court in the Case of Lalitha Kumari V/s State of UP which is reported in 2014 2 SCC 1 , pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KONGALA MOHAN GOUD

¶19

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI R. LAXMIKANTH REDDY, AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

) )

¶21

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSENREDDY}

¶22

WRIT PETITI ON^{No.27648 0F 2024}

¶23

ORDER:^(ORAL)

¶24

This writ petition is^{filedby the petitioner seekingto declare} the action of respondent^{No.3 -the Station House Ofhcer'} Yacharam Police Station,^{in not registering the First Information} Report (FIR) on the^{complaintof the petitioner dated 15'07'2024'} as being illegal^{and arbitrary.}

¶25

2 Heard Mr. Kongala^{Mohan Goud. learned Counsel for the} petitioner and Mr. R.^{Laxmikanth Reddy, learnedAssistant} Governmcnt^{Pleader for Home.}

¶26

¶27

Learned Assistant^{Government Pleader for Home' having} received written^{instructions dated 03'102024 from the} Sub-tnspector of^{Police, YacharamPolice Station' subrnitted that} on the complaint of^{petitioner,respondent No'3 made an entry in} General Diary^{(G.D.) on 15-07.2024' On enquiry it wasrevealed} that the disputes^{between the petitioner and allegedrespondentare} relating to land and^{it is purely 'Civil in Nature'' An online}

¶28

¶29

message to that effect was also sent to mobile mrmber of the petitioner.

¶30

A copy of written instructions along with closure report is served on leamed counsel for the petitioner.

¶31

In view of the aforesaid submissions of the learned Assistant Govemment Pleader for Home, no further orders are required to be passed in this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed, granting liber"ty to the petitioner to invoke appropriate remedies available under law, if he is aggrieved by the closure report. There shalt be no order as to costs.

¶32

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any,

¶33

pending in the writ petition stand closed

¶34

SD/.L. VIJAYA LAXMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

¶35

SECTION OFFICER

¶36

To,

¶37

1 9ne^{CC to Sri Kongala MohanGoud, Advocate} [OPUC] 2. Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT] 3. Two CD Copies TJ LS g

HIGH COURT

DATED:0411012024

(< lrlE S 14 t
oo 0 3 jA|.l 2025

¶42

ORDER

¶43

WP.No.27648 of 2024

¶44

CLOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. @&ri4tu

Dasari Yadaiah v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dasari Yadaiah 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

Gaddam Raju Yadav Vs State of Telangana

Garlapathi Sathish Kumar, Vs The State of Telangana

Arshiya Fatima Vs The State of Telangana

Shri. Vodnala Yagnesh Vs The State of Telangana

Yesala Kameshwar Rao @ Vollaknati Raja, @ Mahesh @ Vijay Vs The State of Telangana

Saleha Sultana Vs The State of Telangana