High Court · 2025

14. Mudavath Harya, S/o. Late Sri Dipla Nayak Aged about 50 years, Occ.- Business, R/o. Ir/etlakunta Village, Bomraspet Manc al Vikarabad District, Telangana-501 501

15. lvludavath l?arnulu, S/o. Late Sri Dipla Nayak Aged about 60 years, Occ.- Agriculture, R/o Metlakunta Village, Bomraspet [t/anclal Vikarabad District, Telangana-50'1501

16. tVludavath Ramesh, S/o. Hanmya Nayak Aged abr,ut 32 years. Occ.- Agriculture R/o Tvletlakunta Village, Bomraspet lVlanr],rl Vikarabad District, Telangana-501 501 .

17. Mudavath Raju, S/o.Lakshman Nayak Aged about 30 Yr-.ars, Occ.- Agriculture R/o. Metlakunta Village, Bomraspet Mandal Vikarabarj District, Telangana- 501 501 .

18. Mudavath Pursha, S/o Ramulu Nayak Aged about 45 years, Occ.- Agriculture R/o. lvletlakunta Village, Bomraspet Mandal Vikarabarl Drstrict. Telangana- 501501 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndi:r praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the l-1igh Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction mor-- partrcularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus to declare the inaction rf respondent no. 3 against respondent no.4 on failure to frle chargesheet in crinre no. 12412024 f or illegal interference and destruction of property by uprooting 78 mango trees by the accused in 13 acres agricultural land i.e., admeasuring (; 10 acres of land in Sy. No.406 and 6.30 acres in Sy-No. 407 at tvletlukunta Village, Bomraspet Mandal, Vikarabad District and consequent inaction of the rer;condents no. 1 to 4 in checking the dorninant, abusive interference of the respon..ent no.5 to '1 9 with the petitioners property, without any right, power and auth,)rization, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust capricious, unreasonable, u nconstitution a I and consequently direct the respondent no. "l to 4 to file charge sheet against the respondent no. 5 to 19 as mandated by law. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cirr:umstances stated in the affidavlt filed in support of the petition, the High Court rnay be pleased to direct the respondent no. 5 to file action taken report for delay in filing the charge sheet in crime no. 12412024 for illegal interference and destruction of property by uprooting 78 mango trees by the accused in 1 3 acres agricultural land i.e., admeasuring 6.10 acres of land in Sy. No 406 and 6.30 acres in Sy.No. 407 at Metlukunta Village, Bomraspet Mandal, Vrkarabad District in a timebound manner pending disposal of the above writ petition and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit .iust and proper in the clrcumstances of the case, pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BHARADWAJ REDDY UIOTHE Counsel for the Respondent No.'t to 4: SRI G.ANIKETH REDDY, AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.29427 of 2025 ORDER: Heard lc;rrrrt'cl counsel for thc pctitionc-r anrl Sri C Aniketh Iiocldy, lcarnt cl Assistant (lor,ernment Pleader for Hornc appeilrrr)i for rcsporrelent Nos.l to 4. trA'ith tlrt'rr corlsent, this writ petition is Lrcing take tr ttp for disl',os;rl at thc a cl nrissior, st.rs('itcclf

2. This rvrit prt'tition has been iiled sccking tht' follorv rr..r praver':- "to daclnrt tlrc itactiotr of respondcnt no.3 ogainst res1l.ttritnt tut.4 ttrr liilurt to lilt' clnrgesheet r crinrc no.124 o.f 2024 .tur i//t'g,r/ uttL't-lcrrnc( atul Llastrlt[tion Ltl yropertrl bV uprooting 78 nran1rt traes by tht accust'l irr 13 ncr'.'s t1!ricultural lantl i.e., ndnrcasurirtg 6.'10 ncrt's o.i latd itr Sv No.-106 arrrl 6.30 Ltcres in Sy.No.407 at Mctlukuttlt Vilh';t tsotttrtsptl Itlttndnl, VtknrabaLl District and consequt'ttt inLtctiott o.f tlt ,'sl,(),,,1c,rts tto.l to I itr clrcckitrg tlrc dontinrutt abusit:t' itttcr.fit ncL' d.f tltt' respL)tulrttt tro.5 to 79 toitlt tlrc petitioner's propartV ruitltLtur tttV rigltl llL)iti(:t' lflLl autlnrization as illegnl, orbitrttnl, utritrst, cnl,ritiotts. utrrenstutaltlc, unconstittttional and consaquently direct tlt r$lotult:nt tro.7 to 4 ltt .filc clmrge sheet against tlt respondent rrr.r.l lo 19 rl.c nmndnle d hv lniL,."

3. Brief facts statcd in this writ petition are that petitione; clainls to be the owner anrl possessor of land total admeasuring to an extcn: of l3 acrr's i.e-, land to an extent of Ac.6.10 in Sy No.406 and Ac.6.3() in Sy,.No.407 at Metlukunta Villagc, Bomraspet Mandal, Vikarabad Distri:t, lt is frrrther submittcc{ that the petitioner's names is nutated in the revcrrue recorcls anci pattcdar passbo()k was also issued in petitioner's far.,rur. Thereafter, petitioner b1, planting mango saplings has converted sornr' portiorl of the subjcct lanci to lrlango farm and from last 13 years, pctitioner is rcaping mango fruits in thc subject land. The case of the petitiotrer is that respondent No.5 insisted th€r petitioner to give mango farm to lrim arrtl lvlrt:n petitioner refuscci to do thc same, responcient Nos.5 to 19 on 21.09.2()l;, trr.spassccl tl-rc subject land and rlanragecl fence with heavy duty earth nlover:s like jCB and I 2 uprooted TSfully grown crop yielding rnango trees. F{ence, the pctitioner rnade a complal'rt and requested the respondent No.4 to take action against respondent Nos.5 to 19. Thereafter, respondcnt No.4 registered FIR No.124 of 2024 datcd 22.09.2024. Further case of the petitioner is tlrat though Fllt No.124 trf 2024 is registcrcd on 22.09.2024, till datc neither action is initiate.d against rcspondent Nos.5 to 19 nor chargc sheet is filcd. Aggrievcd by thc stunc, the [)r(.s('nt writ petition is filerl.

4. Learned Assistant Governmcnt I'leader for I lorne .rppL'.tring for respondetrt Nos-1 to 4 placed on record instructions issued bi,Sub-lnspector of Policc, Bomraspet l'olicc Station, Vikarabad District, rvlrerein it is subrnittcd that on petitioner's conrplaint dalad 22.09.2024, F-lI{ No.124 of 2024 under Section 329(3), 324(4),352. 351 (2) read with 3(5) of BNS u,as registerecl ort 22.09.2024 and during the course of investigation notices uncler Section 94 of BNSS were issued to the petitioner arrd rcsponclerrt Nos.5 to 19 for furnishing relevant docurnents and a Ietter c{"rtecl 23..10.2()24 vr.as issuccl to the 'l'hasildar, Bomraspet Mandal for furnishing the IIOII rrncl palrani copies irr rcspect of the subiect land. Later, 'fhasildar, Bornraspet Mandal has furnished the copies of ROR arld pahani, and on perusal of the sanre, it revcaled that both the parties were having land in the subject survey number. lt is further submitted that as per investigation conductec{ and evidcnce collected, it was revealed that no trees were removed frorn the petitior-rer's lancl and the witnesses have stated that the dispute witlr the subject dispute is alreac'ly pcnding before the competent civil court in O.S.No.42 of 2024 at Learncd Principal Senior Civil Juclge at Vikarabad District and O.S.No-104 of 2024 on the file of I Senior Civil Judge at Vikarabad. -) Learned Assistant Govcrnrncnt Pleader for Horne submits that thc 3 tntirt, investigation rtvcaled that thc disprute betwcen thc parties is civi[ in n;rture ant'l sincc no r-rratcrial cstablish any cril'ninal intent ,n thc p;rrt of the rr'spondent Nos.5 to 19, the irrvestigation officer aftcr obta nine permissions fronr thc SDI'(). I'.rlei r,idr' No.3.l2l I{FR/SDPO-P/VKB/2021i clated 30.0S.21)25 h.rs clost,rl thc cast'as "r\ction [)rop due to Civil in Na(ure" .rnd the sar]'r(' r\'.ls conrrr r r.rrric.r te cl to tht'potitioner. It is furthcr subrnittcd th.r tht. rtslrontlent No.J.rftcr conrpleting the invcstigation has also filecl a fin.rl ltport bt'forc the I-c.arrretl Jr-rclicial []irst Cl.rss Magistratt', Koc{angal uir,le Inn'arcl No..lli42/2025 rlated 15.()9.202:

6. [it.cortlinq tlre suLrrnissions rnadt'by the learnod cotrlrel apPC.]rir)lj olt eithcr sitfu,s, rvitlrotrt cxprossing.rny opinion on the meri[s of t[-rc casc ancl since (lispute rvith rtspect to subject property is pending in (t S.No.42 o{ 2024, on tht I'ile oI I'rir.rcipal Senior Civil Judge at Vikaralrrcl L)istrict ancl ().S.No.10-l ol 2().1,1 on the file of I Senior Civil Juclge:it Vik:rabad, this w'r'it petilion is rlisposerl oi eranting liberty to petitioner to :cek appropriatc renrcll\, :rs availal',le uncler law before the concerned Court

7. With the .rtrovc observation, this writ petition :i rlisposetl of Miscellancous.rpplicltiorrs, if any pending, shall stand closccl. No order trs tt-r S 1 2 To, //TRUE COPYII SD/.N.CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO EIEPUTY REGISTRAR /<;- SECTIb-fi OFFICER The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Hyderabad, State of Telangana-500022. The Director General of Police, Terangana Telanqanar state porice Head - - Quarters Lakdi Poot, Red Hitts, Lakdikaplt, Hyderabid, tefingJna-5000+.

3. The Superintendent of Police, Vikarabad District, O/o Superintendent of Police, Hyderabad Road, Vikarabad, Telangana-sO1 10'l .

4. The Station House Officer, Bomraspet Police Station Bomraspet, Telangana 509338

5. One CC to SRI BHARADWAJ REDDY N/OTHE Advocate IOPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

7. Two CD Copies BSR BS I HIGH COURT DATED: 25109t2025 ORDER WP.No.29427 of 2025 I |ti: SIA 1 :' *( c' 2 7 [[I z$fi ,{, /a- o o i,,, D tSD.TCrri DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS LC ?.,\^