The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P. N. DAYAKAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to4: AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.s: - The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRT JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR ltrrit Petition No.29287 of 2o25 ORDER: Heard Sri P.N. Dayakar, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.l to 4. With their consent, this writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer: "...Declaring the action of resg:nd-ent Nos.2 to 4 in calling tre petitioners to the Police Station at the instance of respondent No.S for settlement of ciuil disputes as iLlegal, arbitrary, unjust and uiolatiue of ArticLe 2 I of the Constitutbn of India and consequentidl prags to direct the respondent Nos.2 to 4 not to summon, threaten, harass or interfere u,,ith the life and personal libertg of the petitioners in conned.ion uith ciuil disputes pending betueen the petitioners and respondent No.5..."

3. Facts giving rise to file this writ petition are that petitioners have certain civil and monetary disputes with respondent No.5, who in collusion with police officials is trying to convert a civil dispute into a criminal matter arrd thereby harassing the petitioners. On 19.09.2025 ar:d 22.O9.2025, tl:.e respondent NO.3/Station House Oflicer, Rajendranagar Police Station from his mobile numb er 8712554133 directed the petitioners to come to the police station for "stt ilement of civil and monetary disputes which they have with he respondent No.4. It is further submitted that respondent N < . t is politically influential, having strong connections with the uling party in the State Government and is using such influen<: to pressurize the pelitioners through respondent No.3 by misrL ing the officia.l capacity. It is further stated that the polict: , uthorities are acting without jurisdiction by intefering in a ci.z t dispute, and their actions of summoning and threatening lre petitioners constitute a direction violation of their fundamer:1 r[ rights to Iife and personal liberty. Questioning the said acti I r, the present writ petition is filed.

4. Based on the instructions issued by the S- o-Inspector of the Police, Rajendranagar, learned Asslstant Government Pleader for Home would submit that respondent I o.5 has given a complaint on 19.09.2025 to respondent No-4 ; ating that on

21.02.2025, petitioner No.2 has taken Rs.37,00,t ( O/- from him for a sale agreement of few plots admeasurinS. 4000 square yards in Survey Nos.380, 381 and 392 situated a. iangsanpally and executed sale agreement and cash receipt 'r, rs issued for the same and also stated that petitioner No.2 tol< him that he will register the land within 31.O3.2025 or else he would repay the amount on or before O2.O4.2O25 which he hrr r failed to do both. Petitioner No. I was also involved in this frat d collectively / \ 3 and they have not given him any money and kept on postponing. It is further submitted that he came to know that the petitioners have been doing Frnancial frauds previously and also stated that petitioner No.2 has previous cases and he came to know about the same on 18.09.2025 and hence requested to consider his case as cheating and take action. It is further submitted that for the purpose of enquiry on the above \ complaint given by the unofhcial respondent, respondent No.5 called the petitioners and the petitioners instead of visiting the police station and cooperating the Investigating Officer frled present writ petition by falsely stating that Rajendranagar Police are calling them for settlement for civil disputes. It is further submitted that due to non-cooperation of the petitioners, the enquiry on the complaint given by the respondent No.S is pending and prays this Court to direct the petitioners to cooperate the S.l of Police / Investigating Oflicer, Rajendrangar Police Station, Cyberabad for conducting the enquiry on the complaint given by the respondent No.S.

5. Having considered the above facts and circumstances and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioners to cooperate with S.I. of the Police for conducting the enquiry on the complaint given by the respondent No.5. It is also made clear that respondent No.4 shall follow due procedure 4 contemplated under law before taking any furtht I action on the petitioners.

6. With the above direction, this writ petition s disposed of. Miscellaleous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. No order as to costs. Sd/.. . SRINIVASA REDDY NT REGISTRAR Asi *---7 //TRUE COPY// sbrror.r oFFtcER To, Commissionerate, HYderabad. 'l The Princioal Secretary, Home Department, Secretarrirl I S-'Hyderabad' Z. the Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad Commissionr t ?te Hyderaoao' 3. the Assistant commissionei of Police, Rajenc r t Nagar L;yoeraoao 4. ih;"$ii;-l$r;"'bmcei, nalenaranagar Police t tation, Ranga Reddv s. o;e Cb to SRl. P. N. DAYAKAR, Advocate [oPUC] 6. iil -C-C; to Gp fOn HOME ,High Court for the I tate of Telangana to 7. Two CD Copies Hyderabad [OUTI District, Telangana. BM fuN HIGH COURT DATED:0911012025 ORDER WP.No.29287 ot 2025 F lHE S o \ 1 i 'r'l I ( ? c) I I ;/ ,7 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS -7r-- z_zfzlze €