Kura Narender Reddy Vs The State of Telangana rep — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

Kura Narender Reddy Vs The State of Telangana rep — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

With the direction that respondents Nos. 2 and 3 refrain from interfering with the petitioners' possession or claimed construction save in strict accordance with law, the Writ Petition was disposed of; there shall be no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondents Nos. 2 and 3 in interfering with the petitioners' peaceful possession and construction of the compound wall around H.No. 1-86/A, Moranchapally village, and in calling the petitioners to the police station, was arbitrary and illegal, and whether respondents 2 and 3 should be directed not to interfere with the construction of the compound wall.

Court's answer

The Court regarded the petitioners' grievance - that respondents Nos. 2 and 3 were interfering with their possession and with the construction of the compound wall - as an issue which is essentially civil in nature, and kept in view the limitations upon the role of the police in matters arising out of civil disputes during investigation or criminal proceedings.

Ratio / Principle

Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 were directed to refrain from interfering with the possession of the petitioners or with their claimed construction, save and except in strict accordance with law.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition under Article 226 - Alleged police interference in a civil dispute over possession and construction of a compound wall around H.No. 1-86/A, Moranchapally village, Jayashankar Bhupalpally District - Petitioners Kura Narender Reddy and Kura Rajitha sought a writ of mandamus declaring the action of the Circle Inspector and Station House Officer, Bhupalpally (respondents 2 and 3), in interfering with their peaceful possession, directing them to stop construction and calling them to the police station, as arbitrary and illegal, alleging collusion with unofficial respondents 4 and 5 - Assistant Government Pleader for Home submitted that representations of both sides were registered as Crime Nos. 141 and 142 of 2017, charge sheets were filed after investigation and the matters are pending adjudication before the courts concerned - Held: the issue is essentially civil in nature; having regard to the limitations upon the role of the police in matters arising out of civil disputes during investigation or criminal proceedings, respondents 2 and 3 were directed to refrain from interfering with the petitioners' possession or their claimed construction, save and except in strict accordance with law - Writ Petition disposed of; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

13217 I

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

WEDNESDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

'THE^{HoNouRABLE sRI JUSTIcE N.TUKARAtt/iJt}

405 0F

Between

Kura Narender Reddy, S/o S/o Laxm Reddy Aged about^{49 ears Occ} Business :

Kura Rajitha, W/o K.Narender Reddy^{Aged about 36 ybars Occ Housewife} Both are R/o Moranchapally village,'Bhupalpally^{Mandal and District}

...PETITIONERS

AND

The State of Telangana rep, by its Principal^{SecretaryHome Department} Secretariat, Hyderabad

The Circle lnspector of Police Bhupal Pally,^{Bhupalpallydist}

The Station Hduse Officer, Bhupalpally^{Police station, Bhupalpally dist_}

Kotha Sarojana, W/o K.Srinivas Reddy^{Aged about 60 year O_cc Housewife} 5. Kotha Vishhu, S/o K.Srinivas Reddy Aged about^{25 years Private employee} Rl/o Ganta Sanjeeva Reddy advocate colony^{Road No.S H.No.1-7-1297,} Hanmakonda. Hanmakonda dist.

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of^{lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,^{the High Courtmay be} pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more^particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the^{respondents2 and 3 in interfering '} into the peaceful^possession and enjoyment^{and constructionof compoundwall} around the H.No. 1-86/A situated at^{Moranchapallyvillage, BhupalpallyMandal,} Jayashankar Bhupalpally District in collusion^{with the respondents4 and 5 and} directing the petitioners to stop the construction^{of compound wall and calting the} petitioners to the potice station as arbitrary and illegai and consequently direct the respondents 2 and3 not to interfere^into the^{construction of compound wall}

,.-'.., i:,,. ..:.' : :;^{.'_: .:lr! .j} ' ,1'

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavil: filed in support of the petition, the High Court may.be pleased to direct the respondents 2 and 3 not to interfere with the construction of the compound werll around the H.No. 1- 86t A situated at Moranchapally village, Bhupalp'ally tulandal, Jayashankar Bhupalpally District frending disposal of the main writ petition

counsel for ttre Petitioner: sRt. RAV| KUMAR VADLAKONDA counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to3: sRl R. LAXMTKANTH REDDY, AGP FOR HOME

Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 4&5:--

The Court made the following: ORDER

a

\ \

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

No. 174O5

OR ER:

This Writ Petition is frled under Article 226 of Constitution^of

India seeking the following relief:

"...to issue a wit, order or direction more^{particularluone in the} nature of writ o.f mandamus declaing the action o.f^the respondents 2 and 3 in interfeinq into t?rc^{peacefulpossession} and enioument and construction o.f compound wall around^the H.No. 1-86/ A situated at Moranchapallu uillaqe,^Bhupalpallu Mandal., Jayashankar BhupalpallU Distict in collusion with^the respondents 4 and 5 and directinq the^{petitioners to stop the} construction of compound wall and calling the^{petitioners to the} police station as arbitrary and illeqal and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 not to interfere into the construction^of compound wall or to^pass suclt anu other order^{or orders as} this Hon'ble court ma!.t deem fit and^proper in^the circumstances of the case....."

None appeared for the petitioners.

Heard Mr.R.Laxmikanth Reddy, learned Assistant^Government

Pleader for Home appearing for respondent^Nos.1 to^3.

The learned Assistant Government Pleader for^Home submitted that respondents Nos. 2 and^{3 have never interfered with} the possession of the petitioners or \Mith the construction^{of the} compound wall, as alleged by the^{petitioners. He further submitted} that both the petitioners and the unoflicial^{respondentshad} submitted representations which were registered as^{Crime Nos. 141} and L42 of 2OL7, respectively. During the course of investigation

\ \

-tf\Eirkii \ .1 " -,-\ .'.'.. \

and enquiry', respondents Nos. 1 and 2 interacted^{with tJre parties.} However, ul)on completion of due investigation,^{charge sheets were} frled, and l:he matters are now^pending adjudication^{before the} Courts con,lerned. In these circumstances, no^{cause survivesfor} granting any relief in the present petition.

I haver perr,rsed the material^placed on record

Havin.g regard to the specific contention of the^{petitionersthat} respondents Nos. 2 and,3 are interfering with their^{possessionand} with the construction of the compound wall, an issue which^is essentially civil in nature and keeping in view the limitations^upon the role of the police in matters arising out of civil disputes during investigation or criminal proceedings, respondents Nos. 2 and. 3 are hereby dirr:cted to refrain from interfering with the^possession of tJle petitioners or with their claimed construction, save and except in strict accordance with law.

With this direction, tJlis Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

S M. OSMAN ALI^BAIG TANT

//TRUE COPY/ SECTION OFFICER

To Hyderabad

1 The 2 The 3 The 4 One at

5 Two Hyderabad [OUTI

1. Two CD^CoPies BM ^Jr GJP

rl

\ \

i It )

HIGH COURT

DATED:10/09/2025

lHE S
<br>() ?'
[} 3 ti--n "'l'J( L:

-

ORDER

WP.No 174A5 of 2017

a

DISPOS]NG OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUIT GOSTS

@
pr
,."

L,.