Petitioner alleged police summoned him to the station to pressure settlement of a civil land dispute with the fourth respondent. Police denied interference, citing a compounded crime. Court directed police not to interfere in or insist on settlement of the civil dispute and disposed of the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
13217 |
iI z 2 : i iI I I I li
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Originat Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF NOVEI\4BER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
WRIT PETITION NO: 19977 OF2018
Between
N.Rajani Kanth, S/o N. Manik Rao, Aged 35years, Occ;Business,R/o Plot No.34, SKD Nagar, Vanasthalipuram, RangaReddyDistrict.
.....PETITIONER
AND
.....RESPONDENTS
Petitron Under Article 226 of the Constitutionof lndta praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavitfiled therewith, the High Courtmay be pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, moreparticularly onein the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaringthe action of the 3rd respondent in calling thepetitioner to thepolice stationat the instance of 4th respondent and threatening to settle the land disputeand therebycausing his interference in the civil disputes, as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutionaland violativeof Article21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequentlydirect the 2ndrespondent herein to take action against the 3'd respondent hereinfor causing his interferencein the civil disputes.
.
I I I I I i I i I
1
l.A.NO:1 oF 2018
Petition under Section 'r51 cpc praying that in the circ rmstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court ma / be pleased to direct the respondent No.3 herein not to ca, the petitioner to the p, ce station or in any manner interfere with his personal life and liberty, pendinq c sposal of the main writ petition
Counsel for the petitioner : SRI GAJANAND CHAKRAVARTI_ I
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : SRI D.PRADEEP, l,r ip FOR HOME
Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : -
The Court made the following ORDER
..1
THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
WRIT PETITION No .195770F 2018
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed underArticle 226 of the Constitutionof
lndia seeking the following relief
"...fo lssue a wil, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaringthe action of the ld respondent in catting thepetitioner tothe policestation at the instance of 4th respondent andthreatening to seftle the land dispute and thereby causinghis inteierencein the civil disputes, as being illegal, arbitrary,unconstitutional and violativeof Atlicle 21 of the Constitution of lndia andconsequently directthe 2nd respondent herein to take actionagainstthe ld respondent herein for causing his inteierencein the civildisputes, andto grant..."
t
2
2016, which had been rnitiated by respondent No. 4. Except for that occasion, the petitioner was not summoned by the pr lice. He further submits that the offence registered against the petitioner was subsequently compounded pursuant to a settlemenl before the Lok Adalat. Accordingly, he prays for dismissal of the writ p,r tition
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall r tan d I closed
I : I
To
SD/- I I. OSMAN ALI BAIG ASSI iTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY' :_9
:_9
SECTION OFFICER
1 . The Principal Secretary, Home Department Secretariat, S :ate of Telangana at Hyderabad. 2. The Superrntendent of Police, Ranga Reddy District.
/
-::ffi
6 Two One CC to CD CopiesSRI GAJANAND CHAKRAVARTHT, Advocate [OpUC] SA BM
I t
I It
HIGH COURT
DATED:1 111112025
<br><br>
ORDER
I
( U
,J
l. t{') .l
,l),,.
'rt' .\J. *
' )F-.-
..{:_t:.--
WP.No.19977 of 2018
DISPOSING OF THE W.P
WITHOUT COSTS.
o\ P
c
BW
2 issues framed by the court
Whether police could summon the petitioner and press him to settle a civil land dispute at the instance of respondent No. 4.
Whether such conduct violated Article 21 of the Constitution.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
N. Rajani Kanth
The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad
The Superintendent of Police, Ranga Reddy District
The Station House Officer, Hayathnagar Police Station, Ranga Reddy District
B. Shankar Yadav
N. Tukaramji
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
