Disposed

P. Kalyan Chakravatrthi, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC10 Apr 2025WP/10802/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner alleged police summoned him to settle a civil dispute with respondent No.4. Government Pleader stated the complaint was enquired into and closed as civil in nature. The Court disposed of the writ petition directing authorities not to interfere with petitioner's life and liberty except in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent authorities not to interfere with petitioner's life and liberty except in accordance with law; writ petition disposed of without costs.

P. Kalyan Chakravatrthi, Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁶ ]

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD^KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 10802 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

P. Kalyan Chakravatrthi, S/o. P. Ananta Ramulu, Age.^{36 yrs, Occ. PYt: ETp} R/o. Plot no. 524, Raghavendra Colony, Beeramguda,^{Ameenpur Mandal,} Hyderabad Dist. - 502032

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

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

¶12

2 The Superintendent of Police, Sangareddy District

¶13

.) The Station House Officer, Patancheru Police Station^{SangareddyDistrict} 4 Perugu Srihari, S/o. Sambaiah, H. No.2-25, Bonthavaripalem^Kakutur, Prakasam District, A.P - 523113

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of^{lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the^{High Court maybe} pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ order^or direction declaring the action of Respondent^{No.4 in summoning the Petitionerand} his father in connection with a civil dispute^{and without jurisdictioncalling} petitioner and his father to the PS and compelling him to settle civil disputes^with Respondent No.3 under the guise of inquiry as illegal^arbitraryand unconstitutional and violative of his fundamental rights^{and in violationof Article21} of the Constitution of lndia and direct Respondent^{No.4 not to interfere in civil} disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent No 3.

¶16

lA NO: I OF 2025

¶17

Petition under Section^'1 51 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 respondent no. 3 not to take any coercive action against the petitioner and not to interfere with his personal liberty, pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI G. DURGA CHARAN

¶19

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR HOME

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent No.4:-

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

¶23

¶24

HON'I}LE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR

¶25

WRIT PETITION No.10802 of 2025

¶26

O11 DEIT:

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Govemment Pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.l to 3 and pcrused the record. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at adn-rission stage.

¶28

Having regald to the nature of /t-s involved and the manner of disposal of the Writ Petition at the admission stage, this Court is of the view that notice to unofficial respondent is not necessary for acl^judication of the present Writ Petition.

¶29

The case of the petitioner in brief is that the 4th respondent is summoning the petitioner and his father to the 3'd respondent police Station and cornpelling them to settle the civil dispute with the 4'r' respondent under the guise of enquiry, which action of the respondent authorities, it is contended as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

¶30

¶31

Per contra, leamed Govemment pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.l to 3 would submit that the 4th respondent herein had approached the authorities and submitted a representation / complaint dated 0l-04-2025. basing on which, the authorities have made GD entry and caused preliminary enquiry to ascertain as to the correctness of the contents ofthe complaint.

¶32

Learned Govemment Pleader further submits that for the purpose of causing preliminary enquiry into the aforesaid cornplaint, the authorities have called the petitioner to police Station and after conducting preliminary enquiry, the authorities hat,e closed the aforesaid cornplaint on 02-4-2025 as the enquiry revealed the dispute to be civil in nature.

¶33

Leamed Government Pleader would further submit that except for the purpose of causing preliminary enquiry into the aforesaid complaint lodged by the unofficial respondent, the respondent authorities are not interfering in the civil disputes nor coercing the petitioner to settle the dispute with the unofficial respondent herein.

¶34

¶35

7 . The aforesaid statement^{made by the leamed Govemment Pleader} lor Home appearing on behalf of^{respondent Nos.l to 3 is placed on} record.

¶36

In view of the aforesaid submissions,^{and since the 4th respondent} had approached the 3'd respondent and^{having lodged a complaintand} the said complaint, on being^{enquired into by the respondent} authorities, having been closed^{on 02-04-2025, this Court is of the} view that the respondent authorities are to^{be directed not to interfere} with the life and liberty of the^{petitioner except in accordancewith} law.

¶37

Subject to above observation^{and direction, the Writ Petitionis} disposed of. No costs.

¶38

Consequently, miscellaneous^petitions, if^{any pendingshallstand}

¶39

olosed

¶40

SD/.P. CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA DEPUTY REGISTRAR

¶41

//TRUE COPY//

¶42

¶43

SECTION OFFICER

¶44

To, 1 . The Principal Secretary Home Department Sec tTh e State of Telangana, Hyderabad

¶45

2 The Superin tendent of Police, Sa ng areddy District 3 The Station House Officer, Patanch eru Police Station Sa ngareddy District

¶46

4 One CC to Sri G. Du rga Charan, Advocate [OPUC] 5 Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶47

1. Two CD Copies

TJ LS Y

HIGH COURT

DATED:1010412025

ORDER

WP.No.10802 of 2025

1,,rt. 5l ".t
it ?
'
or)
2 7 l{r,Y m6
c
li\ A
a'
t a
PA TCH r1)

¶55

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶56

WITHOUT COSTS

¶57

@
a{
bl

P. Kalyan Chakravatrthi, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P. Kalyan Chakravatrthi, 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

Membi Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana

Gatram Venkateshwara Rao Vs The State Public Information Officer

Gunda Raghavulu Vs The State of Telangana

Dr. Poonuri Sanath Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Challa Shahikala Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. M. Revathi Vs The State of Telangana