Disposed

Chithaluri Jalal v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC2 Sept 2025WP/26215/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Landowner sought a mandamus directing police protection for his agricultural land and himself against alleged trespassers. The court noted an FIR was registered, civil suits were pending, and no specific order for police protection had been obtained from the trial court. The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to seek remedies before the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to pursue his remedy before the trial court; miscellaneous applications closed; no costs.

Chithaluri Jalal Vs The State of Telangana — Property and Title | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[^32ss ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR_THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Speciat Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

TUESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF SEPTEIUBER __ ' TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIV}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 262 15 0F 202s

¶7

Between:

¶8

Chithaluri Jalal, S/o Veeraiah,, Aged about 70 years, Occ ; Agriculture, Rl/o H.No.5_ 332. Thonda Vilage. rhirumr rrsiiiMrnl;. s J.iJiui, dirtri"t

¶9

AND

¶10

.....PETITIONER

¶11

'1 . The State of Telanqana. Rep. by jts principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Building, Secretiriat, HVOeraOjJ -""

¶12

The Director General of police, Telangana State, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Superintendent of police, Suryapet, Suryapet^.District.

¶14

Superrntendent of potice, Suryapet Division, Suryapet, Suryapet

¶15

O I[:rBio*,

¶16

tnspector of^potice, Nagaram Circte, Nagaranl Mandat, Suryaper

¶17

t I[:r3[.,"

¶18

6 The station House officer, Thirumaragiri porice station, Suryapet District.

¶19

Gunaganti Anil Rao. S/o Venkat Rao, Aged about 50 years, Occ Busienss. B',$*i?J::'A#rP':,X:"kpuac"r;xvlx'i:'ipartlMa;;a;ilffi [?

¶20

B. Gunaganti Sudheer Raor.!/o_Velkat Rao, Aged about 48 years, Occ Business, Rl/o H no. i45lA, sth-ph;;", lGiiE"ffi;ny, Kukatpa,y, tVedchat_ Malkajgiri District, Telangana State.

¶21

Therati Somaiah. S/o Bakkaiah, Aged about 40 years, Occ Tractor Driver. RIo rhonda Vilase, ThirumrlisiiiMrr"ori, !r.v!pJ,riluict, Tetangana.

¶22

l0 Therati Venkanna. S/o Bakkaiah. Aged.about 30 years, occ Tractor Driver. Rl/o Thonda Viilage. Thirumrrrgiii f,/"rndli srrIJJ, District, Tetansaria

¶23

.....RESPONDENTS

¶24

Petition^{UnderArticle 226 of the Constitution of lndiapraying that in the} circumstances^{stated in the affidavitfiled therewith'the High Court maybe} pleased to^{issue an order or direction more particularlyone in the natureof Writof} Mandamus^{declaringthe action of the respondentNo 6 in non- providingthe} protection to^{the petitioner life and liberty and his agriculture land in Sy No'} 1^{,12AA to an extent of Ac. 0. 14 gts, Sy. No.1 13E to an extent of Ac. 3. 05 gts,} Sy. No.^{3O5AA to an extent of Ac 0' 12 gts' Sy No 305Eto an extent of Ac 0'} f 2^{gts, SV. No. 306E to an extent of Ac' 0 '16 gts' Sy No 30BA to an extentof} Ac. O.^{24gts, Sy. No 360 to an extentof Ac' 0' 15 gts totaling to an extentof Ac'} 5. 1B^{gts whichis situated at ThondaRevenueVillage' Thirumalagiri Mandal'} Suryapet^{District,and non- initiating to control the illegal activities of the} respondent^{Nos. 7 to 10, who are trespassing into the land of the petitionerand} creatingpanicsituationsandtryingtokillthepetitionerishighlyillegal,arbitrary' unconstitutionalandviolationofPrinciplesofNaturalJusticeandalsoinviolation ofArticles,l4'21and300-AoftheConstitutionoflndiaandconsequentlydirect therespondentNo.6toprovidetheprotectiontothepetitionerlifeandlibertyand his agriculture^{land in Sy No' 1 '12AAto an extent of Ac 0 14 gts' Sy No l'1 3E} to an^{extent of Ac. 3 05 gts, Sy No 305AAto an extent of Ac O 12 gts' Sy No'} 305E^{to an extentof Ac 0 12 gts' Sy No 306E to an extent of Ac O' 16 gts'Sy'} No.30BAtoanextentofAc.0.24gts,Sy.No.360toanextentofAc.0.15gts totaling^{to an extent of Ac 518 ' - gts whichis situatedrat Thonda Revenue} Village,Thirumalagiritrilandal,suryapetDistrict'andtocontroliheittegatactivities oftherespondentNos.Ttol0,whoaretrespassingintothelandofthepetitioner andnottocreatepanicsituationsandtryingtokillthepetitioner.

¶25

l.A.NO:1 o^{F 2025}

¶26

Petition^{Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit^{filed in supportof the petition' the High Court may be pleasedto} directtherespondentNo.6toprovidetheprotectiontothepetitionerlifeand libertyandhisagriculturelandinSyNol'l2AAtoanextentofAc'014gts'Sy' No. 113E^{to an extent of Ac. 3 05 gts' Sy No 305AAto an extent of Ac 0 12} gts, Sy. No.^{305E to an extentof Ac 0 12 gts' Sy No 306E to an extent of Ac' 0} 16^{gts, Sy. No. 3O8A to an extentof Ac 0 24 gts' Sy No 360 to an extent of Ac}

¶27

15- gts totaling to an extent of Ac, s. 1g gts which is situated at rhonda Revenue Village, Thirumalagiri Mandal, suryapet District, and to control the illegal activities of the respondent Nos. 7 to 10, who are trespassing into the land of the petitioner and not to create panic srtuations and trying to kill the petitioner pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶28

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR

¶29

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.-l to 6 : AGp FOR HOME

¶30

Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.7 to g : --

¶31

The Court at the stage of admission made the following ORDER

¶32

¶33

THE HONOURABLE^SRI JUSTICE^{N.V.SHRAVANKUMAR}

¶34

W'RIT PETITION^{No.26215 of2O25}

¶35

ORDER

¶36

Heard learned^{counsel for the petitioner and M Srinivas'learned} Assistant^{Covernmcnt Pleaderfor Home appearing for respondent Nos l to 6'} With their^{consentthis writ petitionis takenup for disposal at the admission}

¶37

stage itself.

¶38

This writ petition^{is fiied seeking following} Prayer:-

¶39

" to tleclare tlrc nction of the respondent^{No 6 in non-prot'irlingtlrc} ltrotection^{toLlte petitioner life nnd tiberty nnd his ngrturltureLand} 'trr Sy No.172AA. rc nn extent of Ac.0 14 gts, Sy'No 113E' to an exte,it of Ac.3.05^{gts, Sy'No.3\5AA to nn extent of Ac 0 72 gts'} Sy.No.:bSe b^{rmixtent'ofAc.0.72 gts, Sy No 306E to^nnettent of} A'c.0.'16 gts,Sy^{No.308Ato an extent of Ac'0'24gts, Sy- No 360 to} tm exteni of^{A'c.0.15gts, totalingto nn extentof Ac 5-'18 gts' lhich} rs sittntei at^{ThonclnReoeniVillage, 'l-hinunalagiriMnndal'} Suryapet District^{ancl noninitiating to controltle il[egnlnL:tittities} o.f tlhe respondeti^{Nos.7 to 10 ruhonre ttespassingittto tlrc lnnd of} irc petiti'oner^{cmd creating panicsihrnlionsnnd trying to kill the} petiiiotrcr^{is hightyillegal,arbitrtry,unconstitutionnla-nd r'lo,lntion} 'o.i Principles oi Nantal Justice and nlso in piolatiort of Arhcles 14' it anrl iOO^{A o.f the Constitutionof lntlin and consequently direct} tlLe responrlent^{No.6to prottidethe protectionto the petitionerlife} nntl liberty and^{his agricttltureland in Sy No 112AAto tn extent of} Ac.0.14^{gts, Sy.No.inEtu on extent of Ac'3'05gts, Sr'No 305AA} b an e;rle oi a,^{O.tz gts, Sy.No.305E to an extentof Ac 012 gts'} Sy,No.306E^{Lo an ertenl of Ac.0.16gts, Sy No'308A to an extent of} ic.0.24 gts, Sy.No.360^{to an extent of Ac 0 15 gts, totnliryto an} ettent oi^{Ac.S.-18 gts, ruhichis situated nt ThondnRez'erurcVillnSe'} 'thirumahgiri Mindnt, Surynpet District and to control Lhe illegal nctioities^{o"f tlrc respondent Nos.7to 10 uho nre trespassingitttothe} lilru|of^the Petitionrr^{nnd not to create pnnic situntions nnd trying to} kill tlrc Petitioner '"

¶40

tsrief facts stated^{in this writ petition arethat petitioner claimsto betl-re}

¶41

orryner ancl^{posBesoorof land total admeasuringto an cxtent of Ac.5.1B gts i.e.,}

¶42

¶43

Ac.0.14 gts in Sy.No.112AA, Ac.3.05 grs in Sy.No.113E, Ac.0.12 grs ir1 Sy.No.305AA, Ac.0.72 gts in Sy.No.305EE, Ac.0.j6 gis in Sy.No.3 06E, Ac.0.24 gts in Sy No.308A, Ac.0.15 gts i. Sy.No.360, situared at Thonda Revenue Village' Thirumalagiri Manclal, suryapet Districi. lt is further stated that petitioner''s name was mutated in all revc^ue rcc.rtls and digitar patta prss book was issued in petitioner's favour. The case of the petitioner is that respondent Nos.7 and g having lands in Sy.No.132, intented to grab petitioner's rand and are trying to dispossess trre petitioners from the subject property and arso disturbed the agriculturar operatior-r. Hence, petitioners fired OS.Nos.8O of 2024 and g2 of 2024 on the filc of learnccl Junior Civil Judge, at Thungathurthy (hereinafter referrecl as ,Trial Court,) ancl the Triar Couft aide interim order clated 72.0g-2024 in I.A.No.215 0f 2024 ino.s.No.BO 0f 2024 and I'A No'219 of 2024 in o.s.N o.g2 0f 2024, restrainecl the respondent Nos.7 and B from interfering with the petitio,er's peacefur possession over trre subject property. It is further sated that inspite of the interiml qrder dated dated 1'2'08'2024 in I A No.215 of 2024 in o.s.No.S0 of 2024 and I.A.No.21g of 2024 in O.S.No.S2 of 2024, the respondnet Nos.Z to 10 trespassed tl_re subject property and beat the petitioner with sticks and stones ancl arso tried to k,r him. Hence, the petitioner on 05'07 '2025, made a ,cpresentation and requested responclent authorities to provide police protection to him and subject property. However, till date no protection is provided. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.

L I_earned Assistant^{Government Pleader for Homc' appearingfor} rcsponclcnts^{Nos.1to 6 placed on record instructionsissuedbl' sub-Inspcctor of} police, Tirumalagiri Police station, suryapet District,^{whereinit is statedthat on} petitioner's complaint,^{respondent No 6 registered CrimeNo'181of 2025 under} Sectitrn 31g,324,775,731,356,351,,224,73^{read with 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nagarik} suraksha sanhita,2023^{(herein after referred as'BNSS',) datecl16-08.2025,against} rcsponrlcnt^{Nos.7to 10. During the course of investigation' the investigation} oif icer atlc'lresscd^{a letterd.ated26.08.2025 to the MandalRevenue Of ficer (MRO),} Tirumalgherv,^{SurvapetDistrict, requestinghim to furnish the owncrshipantl} possession tletails of^{the subject lands and accordingly,the MRO'stated that} a{tcr conducting^{dernarcation, the reportwill be furnished.It is furthersubmitted} that aftcr firralizing^{the investigation, an appropriate report will be filedbefore} the concerned court.^{with respect to providing police protection,it is submitted} thar the Trial Court^{t,rde interim order dated72.08.2024in I.A-No.215 of 2024 in} O.S.No.S0 ol^{2024ancl t.A.No.218of 2024in O.S.No.82of 2(h4, restrained the} respondentNos.Tand8frominterferingwiththePetitioner,Speaceful possessiot-t over the^{subject property, however, no orderswerepassedto provide} police protection.^{lt is furtherstated thatthe petitioner,with respect to providing} police protection,^{clid not obtain any specific ordersfrom the Trial court'}

¶48

Having considered the^{above and in view of the fact that the} Petitioner hacl not obtained an\r order^{from the Trial Court with regard to police} Protection ancl since the os.Nos.80^{of 2024 and 82 of 2024 are pending before the Trial}

¶49

¶50

Cour t, this Court cleems it appropriate to clispose oI the writ petitioll granting liberty to petitioner to pursue his remedy before the Trial Court.

¶51

With the above obscrvation, this wrii petitior_r ts disposcd of Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stancl closed No order as to

¶52

costs.

¶53

¶54

SD/.MOHD. ISMAIL DEPUTY REGTSTRAR //TRUE COPYII

¶55

¶56

SECTION OFFICER

¶57

I l[:{;ff^{53L3;xfilT;!'s[;u?:o'n'""t' secreta ria t Buirdinssecretariar.} z. lne Director General ofPolice, Telangana State. Hyderabad. o. 3. 5[:,.3i0r,, The S uperintendent s uperintendeni of potice,- "r bury;pEi'^{F"ril{ s'ri]} Sliyri,".;t'^{JEi6i J,.,"",} bi.,r,.t.^{surya per, suryapet} Inspector of potice, Nagaram Circte, Nasaram Mandat, Suryapet

¶58

t l[:r:ir:," 6 7 The Station House officer Thirumaragiri porice Station, suryapet District. Iy."":,";l:fitiP^^{HoME, H"h c;"u; i""..'r';;"sl:l;'orreransanaat}

¶59

IB One CC to Sht RAPOLU BHASKAR, Advocate tOpUCl Two CD Copies

¶60

SA GJP

HIGH COURT

DATED:0^2llgl2025

-__:i,::t,:r.-<br>' '-, I t.-
,/' * r^ (. ,
;ta,
,:J 1B STP 2tr6
*

¶65

ORDER

¶66

WP.No.26215^{of 2025}

¶67

DISPOSING^{OF THE W.P}

¶68

AT THE STAGE^ADMISSION

¶69

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶70

\ lr(

Chithaluri Jalal v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chithaluri Jalal 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

V. Prabhakar Vs The state of Telangana

Roop Lal Singh, Vs The Commissioner of Appeals

Madaragoni Prasad Vs State of Telangana

Thatikayala Bhasker Vs the State Oftelangana

Ravvala Venkatesh, Vs The State of Telangana

Nazima Parveen Vs The State of Telangana