Disposed

Peethamber Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC11 Jan 2024WP/950/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hotel owner alleged police were threatening to shut his business at the behest of a rival hotelier. Police said they acted on a complaint of illegal liquor sale only for enquiry. Court directed police not to interfere with the business except in accordance with law and to follow Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and Arnesh Kumar guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Writ disposed directing respondent No.5 not to interfere with petitioner's business except per law; respondents 4 and 5 to follow Section 41-A CrPC and Arnesh Kumar guidelines if presence required for

Peethamber Reddy Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

Il I I I! I ! 1

¶3

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

¶4

THURSDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTYFOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO:950 OF 2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

Peethamber Reddy, S/o: Anantha Reddy, aged about 48^years, Occ: Business, K.P. Ftotel and Restauranl, 11-2, Egalapenta, Srisailam ProjectAmrabad Nagar, Nagarkurnool District.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

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

¶13

The Superintendent of Police,^{Nagarkurnool Districl, Nagarkurnool.}

¶14

The Deputy Superintendent of^{Police,Atchampeta, NagarkurnoolDistrict.}

¶15

The Circle lnspector of Police, Amrabad^{NagarkurnoolDistrict.}

¶16

The Station House Officer,^{Egalapenta Police Station,AmrabadNagar,} Nagarkurnool District.

¶17

M/s Hill Top Mrugavanm^{(Hotel Haritha), Rep. by its Managing Director,Hill} top Resort Eegalapenta, Amrabad^{Mandal, NagarkurnoolDistrict.}

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution^{of lndiaprayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the^{High Court may be} pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more^particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, to declare the action^{of the respondent police in} threatening to close down the Hotel and^{Restaurantbeing run by me in my} premises bearing H.No.11-2 situated at EgaLapenta, Amrabad^Nagar, Nagarkurnool Diskict, at the behest of unofficral^{respondentNo.6 herein without} any authority or^{jurisdiction,} as being^{illegal, arbitrary, uniust and unconstitutional.}

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶21

Petition under Section^{151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in} the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition,theHigh Court may be pleased to direct} theRespondentpolicenottointerferewiththedayto-daybusinessactivitiesofthe petitioner in premises bearing^{H No.11-2situated at Egalapenta' Amrabad Nagar' '} Nagarkurnool District,^{pending disposalof the main Writ Petition'}

¶22

Counsel for the^{Petitioner:SRI KARUNAKARREDDY}

¶23

Counsel for the^{RespondentNo.l to 5: GP FOR HOME}

¶24

Counsel for the^{Respondent No.6: NONE APPEARED}

¶25

The Court^{madethe following: ORDER}

I I I I I

I I :

i i i

--'

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{C.V. BHASKAR REDDY} trIRIT PETITION No.95O^{of 2o24}

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

This Writ Petition is^{hled praying this Court to declare} the action of ttre^{policein threateningthe petitioner to close} down his hotel and^{restaura-nt situatedin the premises} bearing No. 11-2,^{Egalapenta, AmrabadNagar,} Nagarkurnool District^{at the behest of respondentNo'6, as} illegal and arbitrary.

¶33

The petitioner^{claimsto be the absolute owner of the} premises bearing H.No-¹ 1-2^{situated atEgalapenta,} Amrabad Nagar,^{NagarkurnoolDistrict.It is the further} case of the petitioner^{that he isregularly payingthe} property tax to the local^{authority uide assessment} No.1644. It is the^{further case of the petitioner that} respondent No.6,^{who is also runninga hotel, had lodged a} complaint before^{respondent No.5, with amala fide} intention to shut^{down his business,.The grievanceof the} petitioner is that at^{the instance olrespondent No 6,}

¶34

¶35

CVBR. J wp_950 2024

¶36

respondent^{No.S is frequently summoninghim to the police} station and^{forcing him to close his business'}

¶37

Learned counsel^{for the petitioner has vehemently} contehded that^{respondentNos.4 and 5 are not having any} power or authority^{to interfereinto the day-to-day business} of the^{petitioner,in anY manner.}

¶38

4 . Learned Assistant^{Government Pleader forHome} appearing for^{respondent Nos' 1 to 5, has submittedthat} respondent No.6^{has lodged acomplaint againstthe} petitioner stating that^{the petitioner is illegally selling liquor} (belt shop) in the^{name of running a hotel'Learned} Assistant Government^{Pleaderfor Home further submits} that having received^{the said complaint, the police madean} entry in the General^{Diary and for the purpose of enquiry} the police have^{summonedtJle petitioner to the police} station and they are^{not interfering with the business} activities ol the^{petitionerin any manner'}

¶39

In view of the above^{submissions,this Court, deemsit} appropriate to dispose of^{the writpetition clirecting}

CVBR, J wp_950_2024

respondent No.5 not to interfere with the business activities of the petitioner, in any manner, except in accordance with law. If the presence of the petitioner is required for the purpose of investigation in any case, respondent Nos.4 and 5 are directed to follow the procedure contemplated under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. and the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Blhart.

¶44

With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶45

7 . As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if

¶46

I I I

¶47

! I

¶48

any, shall stand closed.

¶49

SD/- N. CHANDRA SEK AR RAO ASSISTANT RE ISTRAR SECTION FFICER

¶50

rlrou.l )8 scc^2:\5

¶51

//TRUE COPY//

¶52

To, 1 . The Station^{House Officer, Egalapenta Police Station' Amrabad Nagar'} Naoarkurnool^District.

¶53

, ffi; CCG-sri^{KirunararReddv,Advocate[oPUC].} -^. :. i;; cc"i"^{Gp ior nome, Hig(bourt for the state of relangana'at} Hvderabad [OUTI

¶54

a. Trfuo CD Copies /,-

HIGH COURT

DATED:1110112024

ORDER

5 STAI e'
I
e
o I E t t B 2[2I Z(,)
-.i)
,1
* .* /
Dr-' '),/
- -:-.--'"-

¶60

WP.No.950 ot 2024

¶61

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT APPEAL

¶62

WITHOUT COSTS

Peethamber Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Peethamber Reddy 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shireesha Mahankali Vs The State of Telangana

Kunwar Adil Rizwan Khan Vs The State Of Telangana

Pumpum Vincent Vijay Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Indus Towers Limited Vs The State of Telangana

Sadhineni Srinivas Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Ramavath Srinuvas Nayak Vs The State of Telangana