Syed.Ahmed v. 1. The State. of. Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of lhe constitution of India 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, declaring the action of the respondent No. 3 in calling the petitioner to the police station and threatening to setfle the land dispute and thereby causing his interference in the civil disputes in respect of land Survey No. 85, Admeasuring Ac.3-53 gts, situated at Bhukthapur village (Bheemsari sivvar), Adilabad rown, Adilabad District, as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Article 21 of the constitution of lndia and consequently direct the 2nd respondent herein to take action against the respondent Nos. 3 herein for causing his interference in the civil disputes. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 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.3 herein not to interfere into the civil disputes particularly in respect of land Survey No.85, Admeasuring Ac.3_53 gts, Situated at Bhukthapur Village (Bheemsari sivvar), Adilabad rown, Adilabad District, and not to call the petitioners to his police station in connection with the petitioners property, pending disposal of the main Writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI GAJANAND CHAKRAVARTHT Counsel for the Respondent No.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.L9L4O of 2025 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3, and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing 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 unofficial respondent No.4 is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition.

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that, the 3'd respondent is calling the petitioner to the police station and threatening him to settle civil dispute, particularly in relation to land in Sy.No.B5 admeasuring Acs.3.53 cents situated at Bhukthapur Village, Adilabad Town and District, thereby, interfering in the civil dispute, which action of the respondents- authorities it is contended as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India.

4. Per contra, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 submits that based on the complaint made by the 4th respondent, the authorities have registered a case vide \ \

1.? 2 --- Crime No.36B of 2025 dt.23.06.2025 under the provisions of Section 420 IPC wherein the petitioner herein is arrayed as accused No.1; and that the respondents-authorities, on registering the aforesaid crime, intended to serve notice dt.23.06.2025 under Section 41_A Cr.p.C./35(3) of BNSS, and for the said reason, have called the petitioner to come tc, the police station for receiving the aforesaid notice.

5. Learned Government pleader further submits that the petitioner instead of receiving the notice dt.Z3.06.2025 under Section 41_A Cr.P.C./35(3) of BNSS and fur-nishing the information in his possession in relation to the foresaid crime, approached this Court by making wild and baseless allegations only to prevent the authorities from conducting investigation into the aforesaid crime in accordance with law.

6. I have taken note of the respective contentions urged.

7. Though the petitioner had claimed that the authorities are interfering into the civil dispute without examining the correctness of the crime registered, it is to be noted that this Court in a Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning the action of the respondents in interfering in the civil dispute cannot adjudicate the correctness or otherwise of the registration of crime for which the petitioner has to avail remedies under Section 482 Cr.p.(..1 Section 52g of BNSS. 3 B. However, taking note of the fact that a case vide Crime No.36B of 2025 is registered against the petitioner wherein the respondents- authorities intended to serve notice dt.23.06.2025 under Section 41-A Cr.P.C.i35(3) of BNSS and the petitioner is avoiding to receive the aforesaid notice, this Court is of the view that the respondents-authorities are to be directed to serve the aforesaid notice on the petitioner and conduct investigation into the aforesaid crime registered strictly in accordance with law.

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

10. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// Sd/- A. SREENIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR L1{' / SECTION OFFICER To '1 . The Principal Secretary, Home Department Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana.

2. The Superintendent of Police, Adilabad, Adilabad District. 3. The Station House Officer, Adilabad lTown Police Station Adilabad District. 4. One CC to SRI GAJANAND CHAKRAVARTHI, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

6. Two CD Copies BSR PVL l HIGH COURT DATED:071071202s ORDER WP.No.19140 of 2025 .a= .l r ri{ THE .S ;lt -l t- ,) rl3 stP 2025 : t!I :l DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS 1 \Lg