The High Court · 2025

9. Smt. Ganga Lalitha, Wo Venkat Reddy, aged 50 years, R/o Babusaigudem , Village, Kanagal Mandal, Nalgonda District. ...RESPONDENTS 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 a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS, declare the action of the respondents 4 to 6 in not considering the representations dated 10.07.2025, 23.07.2025, 02.08.2025, 02.09.2025, 09.09.2025 and 12.09.2025 for Police protection to an extent 280 Sq. yards in Sy.ltlo. 63 situated near road running from Nalgonda-Nagarjuna Sagar of Mailaram H/,r S.Lingotam Village, Kanaal Mandal, Nalgonda District and the decree dated. 03-03-2014 in O.S.No. 325 of 2013 on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Nalgonda as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents 4 to 6 to consider the representations dated 10.O7.2025, 23.07.2025, 02.08.2025,02.09.2025, 09.09.2025 and 12.09.2025 to provide police protection or any other protective measure to an extent 280 Sq. yards in Sy.No. 63 situated near road running from Nalgonda-Nagarjuna Sagar of Mailaram H/o S.Lingotam Village, Kanaal Mandal, Nalgonda District, in the interest of justice lA NO: 1 OF',2025 Petitiott under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit iiled in support of the$Er,r,on, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 4 to 6 to consider representations dated 10.07.2025, 23.07.2025, O2.O82025, 0209.2025, 09.09.2025 and 12.09.2025 to provide Police protection to an extent 280 Sq. yards in Sy.No. 63 situated near road running from Nalgonda-Nagarjuna Sagar of Mailaram H/o S.Lingotam Village, Kanaal Mandal, Nalgonda District, pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI KRUPACHAND GOGINENI Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 6: AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 7 to 9: -..-- The Court made the foltowing: ORDER THE SRI N rit Peti No. 808 Thiswritpetitionisfiledseekingthefollowingprayer: "...d.eclare the action of the respondent Nos.4 to 6 in not considering the representations d.ated 10.07.2025, 23'07'2025, 02'OB'2025' 02.0g.2025, Og.Og.2025 and' 12'09'2025 for Police protection to an extent 280 Sq yards in Sy.No.63 situated near road running from Nalgond"a Nagarjuna Sagar of Mailaram H/ o S.Lingotam Village, Kq"naal Mandal' Nalgonda District qnd the decree d"ated 03'03'2014 in O.S./Vo.3 25 of 2013 on the file of Junior Ciuil Judge, Nalgond-a as iltegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional qnd. consequently direct respond.ent Nos.4 to 6 to consider the representations dated 10'07'2O25' 23'07'2025' 02.08.2025, 02.0g.2025, 09'09'2025 and 12.09.2025 to prouid'e police protection or a'nA other protectiue meqsure to an extent 280 Sq.gard.s in Sy..i\[o.63 situated' near road running from Nalgonda Nagarjuna Sagar of Maitaram H/ o S.Lingotam Village, Kanaal Mandal' Nalgonda District (subiect property) "''! i I a I Ii I I I Galb 2 '.2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. i to 6. With their consent, this writ petition is taken up for disposal. Notice to respondent Nos.7 to 9 is hereby dispensed with. l]. The facts of the case in brief as stated are that petitioner claims to be owner of subject property registered uide L)oc.No.14611 of 2O13. It is submitted that one Sri Gange Venkat Reddy and Sri Ganga Vikram Reddy a-re trying to interfere rn,ith the possession of the petitioner with an in:ention to grab the subject property. Accordingly, petitioner filed O.S.No.325 of 2O 13 on the file of Junior -Civil .Judge, Nalgonda for perpetual injunction and an I.A.No.l22l of 20 13 has been filed for interim injunction The trial Court granted interim injunction on 16.L2.2O13 and the suit was decreed on O3.03.2014. No appeal was prefen'ed thereafter on the said order. It is the further case of petitioner that in the month of July, 2025 when the petitioner was cleaning his property and making repairs, resporLdent Nos.7 to 9 along vi,ith 20 unsocial elements has entele'finto the subject property and forced the petitioners -) to stop work claiming that the property belongs to them Immediately, petitioner approached respondent No.6 Police and lodged complaint on 1O.O7.2025, th.e same has been received by respondent No.6 but no action has been taken The petitioner again lodged another complaint

23.07.2025 enclosing all the relevant documents to respondent No.5 and the same has also been forwarded to respondent No.4. On 02.O8.2025, in the presence of respondent No.6, respondent Nos.7 to 9 given undertaking stating that they would take steps to cancel the decree granted in O.S.No.35ll2O13 in 3O days failing which they will not interfere with the petitioner's property. Despite the same, respondent Nos.7 to 9 are interfering in .. the constructions activities of the petitioner. In that regard, petitioner has made representations to respondent Nos.S and 6 on O2.O9.2O25, O9.O9.2O25 and 12.09.2025 to provide police aid. Since, no action is forthcoming, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

4. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Kanagal Police Station, Nalgonda District has placed a copy of instructions through learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home 4 and ',vould submit that on the complaint made by petitioner on 12.09.2025, respondent No.6 Police made a GD ertry on 12.O9.2025 and that since the contents of the complaint are non-cognizable in nature, respondent No.6 filed eL requisition before III Addl. First Class Magistrate, Nalgonda to accord permission to register FIR under Sections 352, 351(2) read with Section 3(5) BNS and invest,gated thq matter and the trial Court has granted permir;sion on .f8.Q9.2O25 and is under process. It is submitted that with regard to complaint dated 09.O9.2025, resporrdent No.6 conducted enquiry and after enquiring with the neighbouring land owners and villagers, it came to the nctice that the dispute between the petitioner and the resporLdent Nos.7 to 9 pertains to land and is purely civil in nature:. As such, the said complaint was ciosed as 'civil in natur(:' on 12.O9.2025 and both the parties are advised to approtrch concerned Civil Court [;. In that view of the matter, since the respondent Police had already closed the complaint as civil in nature and isi not interfering in the civil dispute between the petitioaer and complainant, the petitioner may avaif 5 appropriate remedy as available under law with regard. to the pending complaint, if any. The respondent authorities shall follow due procedure as contemplated under law for further course of action

6. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions, pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shalt be no order as to costs. //TRUE COPYII To, SD/.L. VIJAYA LAXMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER 1 Jhg Principal secretary, Home Department, secretariat, The state of , '--.-"'-"-' Telangana,Hyderabad.' 2. The Director General of police, Hyderabad 3. The Superintendent of police, Nalgonda. 4. The Deputy Superintendent of police, Nalgonda. 5. The Circle lnspector of police, Chanduru, Nalgonda. 6. The sub-lnspector of police, Kanagal, Nalgonda District. 7. one cc to SRl. KRUPACHAND GoGtNENt, Advocate topucl 8. Two ccs to GP FoR HOME, High court for the state of relangana. [our] 9. Two CD Copies PVL BS Drl \ : i, ! i i I :lI i a / / / I t 4 HIGH COURT DATED:2310912025 ORDER WP.No.28808 of 2025 fi"', ' t * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOU COSTS @ "{,'