High Court · 2025

Judgment

1. 2 3 4 The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary to the Home Department, Secretariat Buildings' HyderaDao The Superintendent of Police, Kamareddy District' Kamareddy' The Station House Officer, Domakonda Police Station' Domakonda Mandal' KamareddY District. Vanoa Ramulu, S/o. Rajaiah, Age 64 Years' Occ Agriculture' Rl/o' ililiff""i'r;iViirr'6i,'o6.ixo"d"i Mandal, Kamareddv District' ...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that.in the circumstances stated in tnJatrioruit rir"d therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an order o, oir".lion-*ore particularly. one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any otheruppr"pii"i" *ritleclaring-the action of the respondent No. her to get settle the 3 in calling the petitioner tJil; o;lit; station a.ni issues as per the terms oi"i,ieO [v tne saiO authority^and also forcing to forego her O"ating Sy' No"650/63/1 ' an extent of Ac' 1'12 rights over her agricultural f'"Ji 1/2 gts and Sy. No. 650/ ;;"rt"nt ot i.. i.lZ 1/2 qts total extent Ac. 3.25 gts ShivJr of Domakunta Mandal' situated in 2 bits, situatJd "i'-rt'i'if'v"'pet Kamareddy District, in raoJt oiint respondent No .4' is nothing but abusing' the powers vested in them, O#iu'g th" personal, liberties and violative of provisions .t4, .19 and zr oiir'" ion.tiiution of lndia and also violative of principles of Articles of natural justice. Consequ"ntfy direct the respondent No' 3 not to call the Detitioner to the police staiion thereby not to pressurize her to forego her rights ;;;;h;; said land in favour of the respondent No 4 .threatening "', "b;"" IANO:1O F 2025 Petition under Section,l:1 Cp9 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, irt""Higi'corrt may be preased to direct the respondent No. 3 not to ca, the p"tiitn"r'to'ir,e potice station, thereby not to harass her, thereby not to.prevent'h";;;;;;;;;ner in doing the aqricutturar activities in her aoricultural lands i.u., f"nj. ["lrirg'SV No. 650/ /1, an extent ot Ac. 1 12 1/2 ots and Sv. No...650/ ;'r; ";";;i Xc. z.tZ 1/2 gts totat extent Ac. i#i:'d}B,!:arn z oits, situated ,irtrri'nvrrp"lir,ir* or-o-o,iril"tr^r,i"i,orr, Counset for the petitioner: SRl. K VENUMADHAV Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to 3: Gp FOR HOME Counsel forthe Respondent NO.4: __ The Court made the following: ORDER l I I I I i THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR W.P.No. 18508 of 2025 o RDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner' learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos' I lo 3' and with their consent the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal' at admission stage' 2 Having regard to the manner of disposa-l of the writ petition and the nature of lis involved, this Court is of the view that notice to unofhcial respondent No.4 is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief is that though there are civil disputes between the petitioner and the unofficial respondent' wrth regard to agricultural land in survey Nos 65O/E/ I and 6SOlElU' in a'll admeasuring Acres 3.25 guntas, situated in two bits, located at Muthyampet Shivar of Domakunta Mal-rdat, Kamareddy District' which is subject matter of a civil dispute uide O.S.No.3O 7 l2}2l on the hle of the I Additiona-l Junior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Judicial Magistrate ot First ciass Special (Mobile) at Kamareddy, wherern an order of injunction is subsisting in favour of the petitioner uide 1.A.No.794 of 2021, the 3'd rcspondent is calling the petitioner to the police station and coercing her to settle the civil disputes in favour of the 4r respondent by grving up her right over t-l.e aforementioned la-nd belonging to her, which action of the respondents-au thoriLies it is contended as highly illegal, arbitrary, without any authority ald sanction of 1aw'

4. Per contra,learned Government Pleader for Home appealing on behalf of official respondents while denying the writ averments would subrnit that the 2 petitioner herein had approached the respondents_authorities and lodged a complaint on 24.O5.2025, upon which the respondents_authorities have made a GD entry a;rd took up preliminar5z enquiry.

5. Lcarned Gor.ernment pleader for Home furthcr submits that in the course of preliminary enquiry conducted to verify the correctness or otherwise o[ the contents of the complaint made by the petitioner, the authorities have called the petitioner to come to the police station with relevant documents; and that except causing preliminary enquiry into the contents of the aforesard complaint lodged by tl.e petitioner, the authorities are not interfering in the civil disputes that may exist between the petitioner and the unofEcial respondent nor coercing the petitioner to settle the issuc in favour of the 4rh respondcnt by giving up her rights over the subject property.

6. Learned Government pleader further submits that the respondents- authorities after causing preliminary enquiry into the contents of the complaint lodged by the petitioner have closed the said complaint on 30.05.2025 as "civil in nature"; arrd that the petitioner rvas issued with intimation of the action taken through pMS.

7. Learned Government Pleader further submits that the respondents authorities, except causing prehminary enquiry into the contents of the complarnt lodged by the petitioner, are not interfering with the civil disputes as clarmed by the peliLioner.

8. The aJoresaid submission made by the learned Government pleader for Home is taken on record. 3

9. As it is stated before this Court, by the learned Government for Home appearing for ofhcial respondents, of the petitioner having approached the respondents-authorities ald lodging a complaint on 24.05.2025 and the respondents-au thorities, for the purpose of causing preliminary enquiry to verilr the correctness or otherwise of the contents of the complaint, having called the petitioner to the police station ard thereafter, the said complaint having been closed as "civil in nature" on 30.05.2O25, this Court is of the view that the r€spondents-authorities are to be restrained from interfering in the civil disputes that may exist between the petitioner and the unoffrcial respondent, which are subject matter of a suit uide O.S.No.3O7 /2021 on the hle of the I Additiona.l Junior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class Special (Mobile) at Kamareddy. It is further made clear that in the event of any complaint or crime is lodged or registered aga-rnst the petitioner, the respondents-authorities are to be directed to take action, strictly in accordance with law.

10. Subject to the above observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 1 1. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed To, //TRUE COPY// Sd/- V. KAVITHA DEPUW REGISTRAR (tL\ SECTION OFFICER 1 The Principal Secretary to the Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad 2 3 4 5 The Superintendent of Police, Kamareddy District, Kamareddy. The Station House Officer, Domakonda Police Station, Domakonda lt4andal, Kamareddy District- One CC to SRl. K VENUMADHAV Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR HOME ,High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] Two CD Copies b KKS PVL )v HIGH COURT DATED:01 l|tl202S 'i l'lI s \ (- 0 3 SEP 206 ,,y t'., ORDER WP.No.18508 of 2O2S DISPOSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \9