P.Maladri v. 1. The State of Telangana

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 to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondent No.3 in calling the Petitioners to the Madhapur Police Station, Hyderabad at the instance of 4th respondent and more particularly at the instance of the persons claiming that they have purchased the suit plots 19 and 20 in O.S.No.116/2018 on the file of Addl. Junior Civil Judge, Kukatpally, R.R. District and forcing the petitioner to compromise the suit or sell the petitioners plot No.18- A is as illegal, arbitrary and against to law and consequently direct the Respondent No.3 not to call for the Petitioner and his family members to appear before the 3rd respondent Police Station, at the instance of the Respondent No. 4 and the persons claiming through the 4th respondent. |.A.NO:1 OF 2021 Petition Under section 151 cpc praying that in the c rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No. 3 not to call the petitioner and his family members to the Madhapur Police Station to compromise the civil suit pending in O.S.No. 11612018 on the file of Addl. Junior civil Judge, Kukatpally, R.R.District pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI G.ESWARAIAH (Not present) Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.4 : - The Court made the following ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.1759O OF 2O2I ORDER None appears for the petitioner.

2. Heard learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and perused the record.

3. Despite this Court ordering notice to unofficial respondent, proof of service is not filed till date. However, having regard to the nature of fts involved and the manner of disposal of the Writ Petition, this Court is of the view that the matter can be disposed of without having the audience of the said respondent.

4. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that the 3rd respondent is calling the petitioner to the police station at the instance of 4th respondent, particularly in relation to plot Nos.19 and 20 which are subject matters of civil suit uide O.S. No. 116 of 2018 on the Iile of Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kukatpally, Ranga Reddy District and forcing the petitioner to compromise the suit or sell the petitioner's plot No.18-A in favour of unoflicial respondent, which action of the respondents it is contended as illegal, arbitrary and against law. 2

5. Learned Government Pleader for Horr.e appearing for respondt:nt Nos.1 to 3, on instructions, r.r,ould submit that one Ponnala Shyamachary had approached the 3'd respondent authoritlr and lodged a complaint on O6.07.202 - claiming that he had entr:red into MOU dated 04.01.202 1 with the 4th respondent herein to purchase the plots and that the petitioner herein had trespassed into the aforesaid plot of land on 15.07.2021 and sought r-o take action thereon on the aforesa id incident being complairled of.

6. Learned Government Pleader for further slrbmits that on the respondt:nt authorities receiving the aforesaid complair-rt had made a G.D. entry and in the course of the preliminzLry enquiry it was revealed that there are civil disputes pending in relation to the subject llroperty and accordingly closed the afort:said compiaint as 'ciuil in nature' on 26.06.2021. 7 . Learned Government Pleader further s ubmits that the respondont authorities except causing preliminary enquiry into the complairlt given by P. Shyamachary on 76.O7.2O21 have not calied the petitioner nor forced the petitioner to comprcmise the surt with unofficial respondent.

8. The-eforesaid submission made by the learned Government Pleader lbr Home is taken on record. \ 3

9. In view of the aforesaid submission and taking note of the fact that the respondent authority having received the complaint on 16.07.2021 and after causing preliminary enquiry thereinto having closed the same on 26.06.202I as 'ciuil in nature', this Court is of the view that the respondent authority is to restrained from calling the petitioner to the 3.a respondent police station or coercing him to compromise the suit uide O.S. No.116 of 2018 in favour of the 4ff respondent herein. Further, this Court is ol the view that since as of date, no case or crime is regis[ered against the petitioner, the respondent authoriLies are to be directed to take action strictly in accordance with iaw in the event of any complaint being lodged against the petitioner hereinafter.

10. Subject to the above direction, the present Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. //rRUE CoPY// Sd/. L. VIJAYA LAXMI ASSISTANT REGTSTRAR V SECTION OFFICER Home Department, Secretariat, State of Tetangana Ilg.l-],119'p_"1S_":,r.tary, ar Hyderabad, I elangana. The Commissioner of Police, Cyberbad Commissionarate, Cyberabad. The S^tation l]o_uge Qfficer, Mad-hapur police Station,-iyOeraOad. Two CCs to GP FQR HOME, High Court for the Stat'e rif fetangina at Hyderabad. [OUT] One CC to SRI G.ESWARA|AH, Advocate [OpUC] Two CD Cooies ./t YOv 'l I To

4. d fJ. SA PVL HIGH COURT DATED:01 10712025 .'- "-:. L (a 1 0 Str 1025 2 .;"1r/ ,t */,' t? * a 6' L. I CY'l ORDER WP.No.17590 of 2021 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. a o<