High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased toto issue a Writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the Respondents 4 and S in interfering civil dispute pertaining to paddy purchasing transaction with the petitioner and forcibly obtaining the 4 blank signed cheques, 11 blank signed pronotes, Undertaking letter dated 13-10-2016 and one simple sale deed in respect of two immovabte properties in Sy.No. 906/4 to an extent of Ac. 2-00 situated at Thummadarn village, Nidamanuru Mandal, Nalgionda District and another one property Sy.No. 431 to an extent of Ac. 2-00 Guntas out of that, 1t3rd my share situated at Maheswaram vitlage and Mandal Ranga Reddy District and refusing to receive the complaint rnade by the petitioner before the Sth respondernt dated 28-10-2016 is itlegat, arbitrary, unconstitutional and taking the land into their hands by misusing the powers of the respondent No.4 and 5 and consequently direct the respondents 4 and 5 not to interfere with the petitioner which id purety civil dispute in nature. I Petitiorr under Section 151 CPC pgying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 4 and 5 not to interfere with the'petitioner which is purely civil dispute in nature by return back the 4 blank signed cheques, 11 blank signed pronotr:s, Undertaking letter dated 13-10- 2016 and one simple sale deed in respect of two immovable properties in Sy.No. 906/A to an extent of Ac. 2-00 situated at Tlrummadam village, Nidarnanuru Mandal, Nalgonda District and another one property Sy.No. 431 to an extent of Ac. 2-00 Guntas out of that, 1l3rd my share situated at Maheswalam vitlage and Mandal Ranga Reddy District which \ryere handed over to the respondent No. 6 pending disposal of the main Writ petition. ' ' Counsel for thr: Petitioner: SRI BOMMAW RAZAIIAH (Nor pREsENr) Counsel for the Respondents No.l to 5: AGP FOR HOME The Court rnade the following: ORDER (- I THE HONOT'RABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI a This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following reliefls:- "....to issue a Writ orrder or diiection more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring ttre action of the Respondents 4 and 5 in interfering civil dispute pertaining to paddy purchasing transaction with the petitioner and forcibly obtaining the 4 blank signed cheques, ll blank signed pronotes, undertaking letter dated 13.10.2016 and one simple sale deed in respect of two immovable properties in Sy.No.906/A to an,exte,nt of,Ac.2-00 situated at Thummadam Village, Nidamanuru Mandal, Nalgqnda District and another one property Sy.No.43l to an extent of Ac.2-00 Guntas out of that, l/3'd my share situated at Maheswaram Village and Mandal, Ranga Reddy Distnict and refusing to receive the complaint made by the petitioner before the 5tL respondent dated 28.1:0.2016 is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and taking the land into their hands by rnisusing the powers of the respondent No.4 and 5 and consequentlS direct the respondents 4 and 5 not to interfere with the petitioner which is purely civil dispute in nature..."

2. None appeard for the petitioner.

3. The [rarned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that the respondent-Police are not interfering with the civil disputes of the petitioner as alleged, &d that the relief sought in the writ petition is devoid of substan@ or legal foundation. Accordingly, it is prayed that the .petition be disrnissed. i i i I I I I I I I I I 2

4. Upon careful consideration of the material placed on record, it is evident that the petitioner, in the supporting affidavit, has asserted that the respondents are interfering with the civil disputes and harassing the petitioner. However, the record does not disclose any cogent material or prima-facie evidence substantiating the said allegations. Mere apprehension or bald averments, without corroborative proof, cannot form the basis for granting extraordinary relief under Amcle 226 of the a Constitution of India.

5. 1 [3ve carefully perused the pleadings and materials available on record.

6. Havirrg regard to the submissions of counsel, it is deemed appropriate to reiterate that the respondent/police are expressly restrained from exerting any form of coercion or undue influence upon the petitioner or any other party. Should the situation warrant ,investigation, the respondents shall strictly adhere to the statutory framework. Any investigative: action must therefore, be undertaken only in accordance with due process of law, ensuring the protection of the fundamentat rights guaranteed under Articles 2l and 22 of the Constitution of India. f1 (r 3

7. with the above direction, this writ petition is allowed. No costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, sall stand closed. To, //TRUE COPY// 1 The Principal Secretary, Department of Home Hyderabad, State of Telbngan-a. SECT{ON OFFICER Buildings,

2. The Director General of Police, Telangana'State, Lakdikapool Hyderabad. 3. The commissbner of Police, cyber:abad, Ranga Reddy District. 4- The Assistant Commissioner of Potice, L.B.Nagar, Cyberabad,R.R. District. 5. TheStation House Officer, Chaitanyaouri p.S. Cyberabad., 6. One CC to SRt BOMMAW RAZAIIAH,'Advocate tOpUCl 7. Two ccs to GP FoR HoMEi High court for the state of retangana at BSR BS :, \ \ HIGH COURT DATED:19/0812025 t { S I 2 I JAi| 2126 ( ?t- ( * WP.No.38520 of 2016 ALLOWING THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS It -] KS \a l,[ 2-e