High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of rhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 3 to 6 in interfering with the civil dispute between the petitioners and Respondent Nos_7 and B in OS.No.373 o'f ',2C 2t lending on the file of Hon'ble ' unic r C vil Judge at Huzurabad and al,,;o l-eir harassment to the petitioners, as ilk-'gal arbitrary and violationofthe/\dlnlerimlnjunctionorderpassedinfavouro,thePetitionersin 1.A.No.765 of 2C2A arrd also violation of the fundamental right: unrler Art 14, 19, 21 and 300-A of -€ Constitution of lndia and consequerrtly, to direct the lhe Petitioners respondents 3 t I :i rr;t to interfere with the civil dispute betw€'en and Responden. I''os l, and 8 in oS. No.373 ot 2024 on.the filel of tlon,ble Junior Civil Judge at Huz,Urah,ad and also not to haraSS the petitioner;, in the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition u,nr]er Slection 151 CPC praying that in the ctr;umrdances stated in the affidavit f iled ir support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct the Respondr: r: Nos.3 to 6 to stop their illegal interferenc': with the civil disputependinlb,S.\veenthePetitionersandRespondenlNcsTandSin os.No.373 of 2o.].4 rn the file of Hon'ble Junior civil Judge at Iluzurabad and also to stop their harlssment to the petitioners, pending dis roszrl of the above Writ Petition. Counsel for the' F'eli':ioners: SRI SHAIK MADAR Counsel for the' Fles condent No.1 to 6: AGP FOR HOME The Court made i:hr-' following: ORDER 1: w THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.16675 of 2025 ORAL ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and leamed Assistant Government pleader for Home.

2. According to the petitioners, they are the absolute owners and possessors of land admeasuring Ac.l.00 guntas in Sy.No.500/2/e/l/3 and, to an extent of Acs.2.00 guntas in Sy.No.500/2/e/ I /2, sin:.Lted at Chintriyala Revenue Village, Chinthalapalem (Mallareddy Gudem) Mandal, Suryapet District. When respondent Nos.7 and g tried to interfere with their peaceful possession over the said property, they have filed suit in O.S.No.373 of 2024 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Huzurnagar, against them. Learned trial Court granted ad-interim injunction and the same is extending from time to time. Though the said suit is pending and the said interim injunction is subsisting, on the complaint lodged by respondent No.7, respondent No.6 has registered a case in Crime No.179 of ZA24 against the petitioners herein for the I l I I I I i ) i t 2 t ={se \ail offences purisliable under Sections 118(1), 115(:l)' i52 and 351(3) Ieaci ,rith Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita' 2023

3. Aft,::r r:ompletion of investigation, the Inve';tigating Officer la,ic the charge sheet against the petitiruers herein and the sanre ivas taken onfie vide C'C'No'10 of 2025 against the petitioners lbr the aforesaid offences' llvetr tllen' on instruclic,nr; ,lf respondent No.4, respondent Nos 5 and 6 are interferirrg 'i'ith the peaceful possession of ther pctitio Iers over the subie:t lroperly and also interfering with rhe ':iviJ disputes between tlLr: petitioners and respondent Nos'7 ard 8' rvithout follow,nr; tr:: due procedure laid down under latv lherelbre' they lra'rtr submitted representation dated l'l'112024 to respondt:nt No.3 with a request to taker at:tiot L against respord(:rnt l{os.4 to 6. Despite receiving and a<:knc'wledging the sard rtllresentation, respondent No'3 did not act upon the It is fufiher contended that petitioner No I hrd hled a 4. privat,: ;otrrPlaint under Sections 210 and 223 of Bharatiya ; --t ':,n w 3 Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 againstrespondent Nos.7 and 8 and the same was referred to respondent No.6 in terms of Section 175(3) of BNSS. Even then also respondent No.6 is not registering the crime in compliance with the order of learned Magistrate. Therefore, the petitioners filed the present writ petition.

5. Learned Assistant Govemment pleader for Home, on instructions, would submit that respondent Nos.4 to 6 never interfered with the civil disputes between the petitioners and respondent Nos.7 and 8. The Investigating Officer in Crime No.l79 of 2024 has already completed the investigation and laid charge sheet against the petitioners herein. Further, respondent Nos.4 to 6 will follow the due procedure laid down under BNSS.

6. In the light of the said submissions, notice to respondent Nos.7 and 8 is dispensed with. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.6 not to interfere with the civil disputes f I $I , r 4 between the l,ctitioners and respondent Nos.7 and 8 Iur1her, libefty lli srinted to the petitioners to take steps lgainst respondenl lio.6 for not registering FIR in complian<e with order passt:d llr learned Magistrate' Miscellrneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. f h,.;rr: shall be no order as to costs. //TRUE COPY' SD/ K.MADHAVI qSISTANT REEISIBAR- A SECTION OFFICER \ \ \ To, dk.ar Secretariat 1 . The Princ,pal S;ocretary, Home Department'- Dr'B R Amtre ' B#r;;', i,i;ii drno noao, Hvderabad' State of Telangana 2. The Directlr General of Police, Lakdikapul' Hyderabad 3. The Superin' s 1r lr:nt of Police, Suryapet District' 4. The Deputy li r-r1 ,errintendent of Police' Kodad' Suryapel Dis rict' 5. The Circle lrtspector, Kodad Rural Police Circle' Kodac' Suryap'-'t District' 6.TheSub-lrslle'<tlrofPolice,Chintalapalem,suryapetDistriot, 7. One CC kr SlRl SiHAIK MADAR' Advocate [OPUC] 8- Two CCs t:r (it) FOR HOlVlE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad O t- r-l

9. Two CD Oo rie:r; BSR f' HIGH COUFI.l- DATED:19/06,'2025 CC TODAY ORDER 4 Q.'t' ,E ST4 ,4 '/+C L' ) C] (- 2 I luN ?025 WP.No.16675i of 2025 -i ! ,v .!] -k. DISPOSIN13 OF THE WRIT PETITION, WTTHOUT C;I]STS (. ).- \ p ; I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I i i