D. Kishan Rao v. 1. The State of Telangana

Gounsel tbr the Respondents No 1 &22 SRI D. PRADEEP AGP FOR HOME Gounsellbr the Respondent No 3: -- The Gourt made the following: ORDER THE HONOI'RABLI SRI JIISf,ICE IT.TUI(ARAUJI ORDEK This Writ Petition is filed with the folloriuing reftif: -1-3O "...to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2"d respondent in not considering the application of the petitioner dated 05.02.2018 for pio.riait g potice pro[ection to the petitioner fot 9" purpose of erecting the fencing to his land admeasuring guntas in Sy. No. 488, 489, 487 and 49O Part Ac. at Jadchirla Highway, Mahabubnagar District, wtrich the 3'u respondent caused damage by way of trespass, . even after foisting the criminal case in Crime No. 233\2OLT was foisted against the 3't respondent as illegal unlawful contrary to law and consequently $re-ct *rJ Z"a respondent to consider the reqtrest of the petitioner to give police protection so as to gnaple- -th9 petitioner to re-erett the fencing to his above land 1htq w"" r.-o.red by the accused in crime No. 233/2OLT atd' pass..." I I i I

2. Heard Mr.M.Damodar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.L and,2'

3. Learned counsel for tl.e petitioner submits that as respondent No. 2 failed to consider petitioner's representation dated 05.02.2018 seeking police protection for the purpose of erecting fencing around tl1e subject land, which was admitted to belong to t}e petitioner by \ \ .t i I I I i I . 2 resrpondent No- 3 even after registration of crime No. 233 of 2017, the present writ petition has been fired seeking approp,riate directions from this Court.

4. The learned Assistant Government preader for Home submits that, based on the petitioner's report, crime No. 233 of 2ol7 was registered against respondent No. 3 and conseqr-rentiar proceedings were initiated. However, with regard to the petitioner's request for police protection, it is submifi:ed that, in the absence of any order issued by a competr:nt civil court or higher authority, no steps courd be taken try the porice. It is further contended that the rerief sought by the petitioner under Article 226 of tle India is not rnaintainable in such the petition is liable to be crrcumstances, and hence, Constihrtion of dismissr:d.

5. I h.ave pemsed the material placed on record. 6' The essence of the petitioner,s grieuance is that the respondent-porice authorities tailed to act on his representation dated os.o2.2o1g seeking police protectio ^ I ..) 3 facilitate erection of fencing around the subject property. In substance, the petitioner's prayer amounts to seeking ."...,-,..',..!"-.-..-,.,,".,.,.'....,., directions to the police both in respect gf ell_e""ggg" registering the crime and in providing police protection. \ \

7. It is a well-settled position of law that police protection cannot be granted in the absence of a clear fachral linding or adjudication of ownership or possession by a competent civil court. When a dispute involves civil rights over immovable :, '.. propert5r, the appropriate course of action for the petitioner is to approach the competent civil court for necessary reliefs or, in the alternative, to seek appropriate orders before the .''...,.,.... jurisdictional Magistrate for registration of a crime, tr *y cognizable offence is made out.

8. In the absence of exhaustion of such statutory remedies, invocation of the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution for grant of police protection is not maintainable.

9. However, while dismissing the writ petition, liberty is -. reserved to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedies t t 4 available under law before the competent civil court or the jurisdictional Magistrate, as the case may be.

10. With this obsenration, this petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand (\ \\\\ closed. To,

5. Two DAN PMK ft.Aq. ,/TRUE COPYII Sd/-P.C SULEKHA DEVI. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR. 6 SECTION OFFICER , :..:, :' . , .:: Home Department, State of Telangana, Secretariat, Officer , Jadcherla Police Station, Jadcherla, ,M DAMODAR REDDY, Advocate tOpUCl HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at r r' / / HIGH COURT ',::,.1.. ,.-.:, .,... DATED i3111012025 ORDER WP.No.8530 of 2018 () ( t 1HE S ii 5 !{ Ll 2{176

2.. * StrA DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS @ln,^, e-r{\ vl >b : ; i, i t i I I I