Raavi Shankar Reddy v. 1. The State of Telangana

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI ROHITHA pRIyANKA BANAI,.A Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 6 : Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.7 to 10 : - The Court made the following ORDER l, I w THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR Writ Petition No.28456 of 2025 This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer: ". . .declaing the action of the Respondent No.6 in non-considering the representation of the Petitioner dated 08.08.2025 and non initiating to prouide the police protection to the petitioner by implementing the decree and iudgment in O.S.No.2O2 of 2016 on the Jile of Junior Ciuil Judge Cour|Hagathnagar and non-initiating to control the illegal actiuities of the Respondent Nos.7 to 10 as highlg illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and uiolation of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 3OOA of constitution of India and also uiolation of pnnciples of Natural Justice and consequentlg direct the Respondent Nos.6 to prouide the police protection bg implementing the Decree and Judgment to the Petitioners life and libertg as utell as to his propertg i.e., agiculture land to an ertent of Ac. 1-209ts., in Sy.No.273/ E/ 1A which is situated at Turkagomjal AbdullopurmetManda[Ranga Reddy District (subject land)..." Village 2

2. Heard learned counsel for the pt:titioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Horne appealing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 6. With their consent, this writ petitior-i is taken up for disposal. Notice ro responclent Nos.Tto 10 is dispensed with

3. The facts of the case in brief are hatpetitioner claims to be owner, possessor and enjo_r,er t:r thc' subje ct landacquirt:d by way of registered sale rt:ed bearing Doc.No.2282O/2006 dated 11.12.2006 and rl-e pr-.titioner was also issued with pattadar passbooks. Ir is submitred that respondent Nos.7 to 10 who ar(, a1i realtors approache<l the petitioner and demanded to st,ll thc subject land at a cheaper rate and the same u.as r lcnied by the petitioner, as such respondent Nos.7 to l() dr:veloped grudge on the petitioner and started interl'er-ing urith the peaceful possession of the petitioner. In lhat regard, petitioner lrled a suit in O.S.No.202 of 201,6 fc,r iniunction on the {ile of Junior Civii Judge, Hayathnagzrr and the trial Court decreed the said suit in favour of petitioner on

14.02.2019. However, respondent Nos.7 to 1O did not stop the illegal interference into the petitionet'' i possession w J Accordingly, petitioner approached SHO, Vanasthalipuram and lodged a complaint and the SHO registered a case in Cr.No.692/2023 for the offences under Section 447, 427' 506 and 509 IPC. The SHO conducted counselling to respondent Nos.7 to 10 and warned them not to interfere in the petitioner's property. It is further sr.rbmitted that respondent Nos.7 to 1O are trying to kill the petitioner by trespassing into the petitioners lands by using deadly weapons, due to which petitioner again approached respondent No.6 and lodged complaint on O8.OB 2O25 requesting to provide police protection. However, respondent Police did not initiate any action. Thereafter, petitioner again approached respondent Nos.3 to 5 and requested. to direct respondent No.6 to act on the complaint of the petitioner. Since, no action is forthcoming, the I I t petitioner filed the present writ petition. I

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, would submit that with regard to property disputes, petitioner may avail alternative remedy and with regard to complaint lodged by the petitioner, prayed this Court to pass appropriate orders to that effect. 4

5. After arguing the matter at length, lezrrLted counsel for the petitioner submits that they would f l,: E::ecution Petrtion before the trial Court for executrorr of decree passed in tl-reir favour

6. In that view of the matter, this u'r rl pr:tition 1S disposed ol with a direction to respondent irrrthorities to consider the complaint/ rcpresentation of th3 pctitioner dated 08.08.2025 to the extent of pro..iding poiicc protection to the petitioner's personal life a ncl libe rty as and rvhen required. Needless to state that pr, itioner may avail appropriate remedy as available under la\\. Miscellaneous petitions, pending, if anr', shall stand closed. Horvever. there shal1 be no order as to .fsts ,TRUE COPY// SD/- MOHD. ISMAIL T)EPUTY REGIST \sEcTtoN State of Telangana at Hyderabad. OFFTCER 1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, secretariat, secretariat Buildings, 2. The Director General of Police, Telangana State, Hydb rabac. 3. The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda Commisiio ne:rate. 4. The Deputy Commrssioner of Police, L.B. Zone, Rach: kcnda 5- The Assistant Commissioner of police, Vanasthalipuram Division, 6. The Station House Officer, Vanasthalipuram Station, F achakonda Rachakonda Co m m issio nerate. Comm issionerate. Commission erate. I: 7 Two CCs to GP FOR HOIVE, High Court for the State rrf Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] One CC to SRI ROHITHA PRTYANKA BANALA, Advocare tOpUCl Two CD CoJries 8 I To W. SA TKS .,2/.: .:, t. \ \ ',1 : - 1..i,'.-'\, '' (.,r' I 27 filt firfi \ \../ '\. f ;..-. , \\- '/ HIGH COURT DATED:1910912025 ORDER WP.No.28456 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. tln' a /./ Lr \C