Disposed

Sri Ramanagari Srinivas v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC7 Mar 2024WP/6102/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tenant facing interference by premises owner sought direction for fair investigation into a crime registered on his complaint. Court, without commenting on the inter se dispute, directed the Station House Officer to complete investigation within three months and file a charge sheet.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No.2 directed to complete investigation in Crime No.1279 of 2023 within three months and file charge sheet; no order as to costs.

Sri Ramanagari Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FORTHE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

THURSDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.^BHASKARREDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 6102 OF 2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

Sri Ranranagari Srinivas, S/o.^{VittalRamangari,Aged 55 years,Occ.. Fancy} Store Business, R/o. H.No.5-6-521/5,^{Plot No.781, Vaidhenagar RoadNo-3,} Saheb Nagar, Hayathnagar, Vanasthalipuram,^{Ranga Reddy District.}

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Hyderabad.

¶12

The Station House Officer, P.S. Vanasthalipuram, Rachakonda^District.

¶13

The Conrnrissioner of Police, Rachakonda.

¶14

...RES'ONDENTS

¶15

Petition urlder Article 226 of the Constitution^{of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filedtherewith, the High Court maybe} pleased to rssue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction more^{particularlyone in} the nature of Writ of Mandamus to declaring^{the actionof the RespondentNos2} and 3 herein in not conducting effective^and fair^{investigation as perthe} petitionerb application dated. 18.10.2O23 & 22.12.202'1 in Crime.No^'1279of 2023, of P.S. Vanasthalipuram,^{Rachakonda,as being illegal, arbitrary and} violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution^{of lndia and the action of the.}

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC^{praying that in the circumstancesstated} in the affidavit filed in support of the^{petition,the HighCourt may be pleasedto} direct the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 to^{providepolice protectionto the Petitioner} as per the Petitioner's application^{dated.18.'10.2O23& 22.12.2O21 in accordance} with due process of law pending disposal of^{the writ petition-}

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI^{VEROSESANJANA}

¶19

Counsel for the Respondents: ASST.^{GP FORHOME}

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

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

¶22

WRIT PETITION No.61O2^{OF 2o24}

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

This writ petition is filed^{seeking the following relief:}

¶25

"....to issue an appropiote^{Wit, Orderor Direction} more partianlartg one^{in the nature of Wit of Mandamus} to declaring the action^{of respondent Nos.2and 3 Lerein} in not conducting effectiue^and fair^{inuestigation as per} the petitioners application^{dated 18. 1O.2O23 and} 22.12.2021 in Cime^{No.1279 of 2023of} P-s.Vanasthalipuram,^{Rachakondaasbeing illegal'} arbitrary and uiolatiue of^{Articles14 and 21 of the} Constitution of India...^"

¶26

It is stated that the^{petitioneris the tenantof plot No.315,} H.No.5-6-2 I / 1, Road No-3,^{Vaidehinagar,Vanastalipuram,} Ranga Reddy District and^{runninga fancy store by paying} monthly rent from time to time^{The case of the petitioneris} that, when the owner^{of the said premisesis interferingwith his} possession and threatening^{him to vacatethe said premises,he} was constrained to institute^{a suit in O.S.No.619 of 2O21 on the} hle of the^.Junior Civil^{Judge at Hayathnagar, RangaReddy} District seeking^{perpetual injunction and the sameis pending} for adjudication. The^{grievance of the petitioner is that during} the pendency of the said^{suit, when the owner of the said} premises is interfering with his^{possession,helodgeda} complaint, dated 18.10.2023^{beforerespondent No.2 against the}

¶27

¶28

t i I i

¶29

owner of^{the saidpremises and acting on the said complaint'} respondent^{No.2 registered a case in CrimeNo' 1279 of 2023 '} dated 19.1O.2^{O23 tor the offencespunishableunderSections} 44S,42Tand5o6oflPC.Thegrievanceofthepetitioneristhat even after^{registration of crime' the respondents-police are not} conducting^{fair and properinvestigation into the said crime'}

¶30

This Court,^{withoutexpressingany opinionon the inter se} disputes^{pending betweenthe petitionerand owner of the said} premises, deems^{it appropriateto disposeof this writ petition} directing^{respondent No'2 to complete the investigation in Crime} No.l2Tgof2023,asexpeditiouslyaspossible,preferablywithin a period^{of three(3) months from the date of receipt of a copyof} this order^{and hle charge sheet before the Court concerned'}

¶31

No order^as 4 Accordingty,^{this writ petitionis disposed of}

¶32

to costs

¶33

Miscellaneous^{Petitions, ifany, pendingin this writ}

¶34

petitron shall^{stand closed'}

¶35

SD/. T. VIJAY^KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION [-..

To,

1 The Principal Secretary,^{Home Department, TheState of Telangana'} Secretariat^HYderabad 2 Yh;'5i;i;;; Fi"*"brti."r,^{P.S. Vanasthatpuram, RachakondaDistrict.} 3 The Commissioner^{of Police, Rachakonda'} 4 Orre CC to SRI^{VEROSE SANJANA, Advocate t9!'9t-l} 5 iil ;d;j"-GP^{F-onuoH,re, ilGrt i""t for tne'stateof relansana lourl} D Two CD CoPies BN c\ff GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:0710312024

ORDER

WP.No.6102 of 2024

k s{ HE sTA r6
?2 APB 2021 zo
.L
i t
.OSSPATCH g-0

¶45

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶46

@.,ttq,\u,.*-/ >'

Sri Ramanagari Srinivas v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Ramanagari Srinivas 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

R.Ravi Naik @ Venkat Ravi Naik Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Kanchi Dinesh Vs The State of Telangana

V. Ramesh Babu Vs The State of Telangana

Gaffar Khan Vs K. Kranthi Kumar

Relief Beauty and Spa, Vs The State of Telangana

Rachamalla Sravanthi Vs The State of Telangana