S.Shravan Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 ot the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particulady one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No.6 in interfering into the peaceful life and liberty of the Petitioner and also interfering into the civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent No.7 and calling the Petitioner to the Police Station and detaining and threatening to pay the due amount of Rs.33,000/- to the Respondent No.7 without having any jurisdiction is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of Articles 14,21 and 300-A of Constitution of tndia and also violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the Respondent No.6 not to interfere into the peaceful life and liberty and not to interfere into civil disputes between the petitioner and Respondent No.7 and not to threaten the Petitioner to pay the due amount of Rs.33,0001 to the Respondent No.7. lA NO: 1 OF 2O2s Petition under Section 15'l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.6 not to interfere into the peaceful life and liberty and not to interfere into civil disputes between the petitioner and Respondent No.7 and not to threaten the Petitioner to pay the due amount of Rs.33,000/- to the Respondent No.7 pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRt RAPOLU BHASKAR Counsel for the Respondents No.1to6 : Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondents No.7: -- The Court made the following: OROER TIC I.ONIT.ESRII'SIGT. VIIOKUIVIAR Writ Fetiltim No.Bil2d 2[25 GDR.: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos' 1 to 6, and with the consent of the learned counsel appearinq for the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the admission stage'

2. Having regard to the manner of disposal of the Writ Petition at the admission stage and the nature of /s involved. this Court is of the view that notice to unofFrcial respondent No.7 is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition.

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the 6h respondent is coercing the petitioner to pay Rs.33,000/- to the 7th respondent, thereby interfering with his life and liberty and also involving himself in the civil dispute, which action of the respondents it is mntended as highly illegal and arbitrary.

4.Percontra,learnedGovernmentPleaderforHomeappearingon behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 6 would submit that the petitioner had approached the respondents-authorities a nd lodqed a complaint dt.24.03.2025, wherein he stated that he owes money to the 2 7h respondent and that the 7b respondent is harassing him to pay the aforesaid amount.

5. Learned Government pleader further submits that the respondents- authorities on receiving aforesaid complaint, have made GD entry and are conducting enquiry into the aforesaid complaint lodged. 6. Learned Government pleader further submits that while the respondenb were causing enquiry into the aforesaid complaint, the petitioner had approached the respondents_authorities and submitted lefter dt.11.04.2025 claiming that he has setfled the dispute with the unofficial respondent herein, whereby the petitioner has agreed to make payment of the amount of Rs.33,000/_ on 18.04.2025.

7. Learned Government pleader further submiLs that on the petitioner submitting the aforesaid retter, the respondents-authorities have crosed the case on U.O4.ZOZS as compromise{; and now that it appears of peutioner having faired to abide by the agreement he had entered into with the unofficial respondent to make the aforesaid payment on 18.04.2025 and anticipating that the unofficial respondent may approach the respondents-authorities by rodging the compraint against the petitioner has filed the present Writ petition making altegations against the respondents-a uthorities. ( r. 3

8. Learned Government Pleader further submits that the respondents- authorities, except causing preliminary enquiry into the complaint lodged by the petitioner, are not interfering with the life and libefi of the petitioner, nor involving themselves in the civil dispute that the petitioner has with the 7h respondent.

9. The aforesaid submission made by the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 6 is placed on record '

10. In view of the aforesaid submission, since, it is now informed to this Court that the complaint given by the petitioner having been closed on 17.04.2025 as compromise, inasmuch no complaint is lodged against the petitioner as of date. in the event of any complaint being made against the petitioner. the respondents are directed to take action strictly in accordance with law..

11. Subject to above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of' No order as to costs.

12. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.A. SRINIVASA REDDY ISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER I To,

1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretaflat Building, Secretariat, State of Telangana, Hyderabad.

2. The Director General of Police, Telangana, Hyderabad. 3. The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda, Rachakonda Commissionerate' Telangana, Hyderabad.

4. The Dlputy Commissioner of Police, L.B.Nagar Division, Rachakonda Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District.

5. The Assistant Commissioner of Police' L.B. Nagar Circle, Rachakonda Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District.

6. The Station House ffitcer, Sarumagar Polioe Station, Ranga Reddy Dstrict. 7. One CC to SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR, Advocate. TOPUCI 8. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] 9. Two CD Copies. BS LS o I HIGH COURT DATED:29 10412025 ) ) ORDER WP.No.131O2 of 2025 t )- c a t\L- '1. 2l Jlln p5 (i. (- 4)r .i n ., 7,-. 1-1 1 -:-. ( ( DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITTON WITHOUT COSTS '/^