High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 of the cqngtitutign of lndia praying that in the circumslances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, Ihe High Court may be pleased to tssue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the natqre of writ of Mandamus declaring the action qf the 3rd respondent in isusing lhe lmpugned Proceeding No.Bt494t2O24, dated 22'10'2024 and seizing the agrigulture lands of the petitioner to an extent of Ac.26-20 gts in Sy.No.25, 26' 178, 17g, 181, 1BB, 189, 191, 192' 193, 194, and 197 respectirTely which is DacharamVillage,NereducherlaMandal,suryapetDistrict,byissuingthe proceedingsU/Sec'l64ofBNSSAct,withouthavingSnyjurisdictionishighly illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutiona l, violation of Articles 14 and 21 and 300:A of the constitution of lndia and also in violation of Principles of Natural Justice and cons-equently direct the 3rd respondent in issuing the lmpugned Proceedinq No.Bl4g4t2o24, dated 22.10.2024 and restore the seized-agriculture lands of the petitioner to an extent of Ac.A-20 gts in Sy.No.2 S, 26, 178. 179, 181, 1BB, 189, 191, 192, '193, 1)4. and .197 respectively which is Dar:haram Village, Nereducherla Manciar, Suryapet District, by issuing the proceedings U/sec..r64 of BNSS Act lA NO: 'l OF 2 024 Petition under Section .151 CpC praying thaf in the cirQumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pteased to suspend the operation of the lmpugned Proceeding No.Bt494l2O24, daled 22 10 2p24 issued by the 3rd respondent, by directing the 3rd rgspondenl tq restore the seized agriculture lands of the petitioner to an extent of Ac.l6_20 gfg in Sy.No 25, 26, j7B, 1Zg, 181, 1SB, .t89, 1g1 , .tg2 153, 1g4, and 197 respeclively which is Dacharam Village, Nereducherla Mandal, Suryapet Distr:rqt, by issuing the proceedings U/Sec..!64 of BNgS Act pending disposal of the writ petition lA NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under S;ection 1Sj Cpq praying that in thg circumstances olatad in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High qourt may be pleasod tq direct the respondenl. rrlos.3 to 5 not to interfere into the peacefur pogsession anq enjoyment of the agrir;urture rand to an extent of Ac.26-20 gts in sy.N9.25, 20, 178, 179, 181, 188, t89, 191, 1g?, 1g3, 194, ano 197 respectivety which is Dacharam Village. Nereducherla Mandal, Suryapet District pending disposal gf the wrif petition lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under fierction 151 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Ie direct the Respondent l!os.3 to 5 to handover the paddy crops of the petitioner which is harvested by them, in the rand of the petitroner to an extent of Ac.26.?Q Gts, in Survey No.25, ?-6, 17A, 1tg, 181 ,188, 189, 1g1 ,1g2,193, 194 and 1Q7 which is situated at Dacharam Virage, Nereducherra Mandar, sryapet District during the pendency of :;tatus-quo directions of this Hon,bre court in writ petition No,30360 o1 2024 without following the directions of this Hon'ble court pending disposat of the Writ Petition Counset for the Petitioner: SRl. RAPOLU BHASKAR Counsel for tlre Respondent Nos. 1to4: GP EOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.S: GP FOR HOMF CounsBl for the ResPondent No.6: - The Court mqde the following: ORDER THE EtO N'BLE SRI JUsTrcE c.v. BHASKAR R.EDDY WRIT PETITI ON No.3O3 60 of 2o24 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking following relief: . "For the re€rsons stated in the accompanying affidavit. the petitioner herein prays that this Fon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropnate writ, order or direction mc,ro particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandanus declaring thc action of the 3.d respondent in issuing the tmpugne(t proceeding No.B/a94/2O24, dated 22.IO.2O24 and, seizing the agriculture lands of the petitioner to an eKtent of Ac.26_2O gts in Sy.No.25, 26, l7A, t|g, .8l,1g8, 1g9, 19l, 192, 193, 194, and 192 respectively which ls Dachar:Lm Village, Nereducherla Ma.edal, Suryapet District, by issuing the proccedings U/Sec 164 of BNSS Act, qithout having any jurisdicticn ts highil, illega.l, atbitrary, unconstitutional, violation ofArticles 14 and 2r and 3oo-A of the cc,,,stitution of India and also in violation of principles of Natural Justice and r:onsequently direct the 3.,r resl)ondent in issuing the Impugned proceeding No.Lt,,494/2024, dated 22-10.2024 and restore the seized agriculture lands of the petitioner to an extent ofAc.26-j2(,grs in Sy.No.2S, 26, tZB, 179, 181, 188, 189, lgt tg2, tg3, 194, and 197 rer;pectivery which is Dacharam v lage, rJr:reciucherra Mandar, suryapet District, by issuing thc proceedings U/scc. 164 ol BNSS Act and pass such other order cr orclers as this Hoa,ble Court may dcem lit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

2. Petitioner is the pattadar and possessor of the agricultural land admeasuri:nlr to a', extent of Acs. z.r4 % guntari a,d land admeasuring to an extent of Acs. 10.20 y2 gJ..tas stands in the name of her elder son, Acs. 4.o2 guntas stands in the name of her second son and Acs. 8.01 gu:n:as stands in the name of her younger son {rrrd all the lands are in Single Compact in Survey Nos.25, 26, fia,179, lg1, 1gg, 189, 191, 192, 1)9, 194 and 197, situated at Dachararn Revenue Vil.lage, Nereducherla Mandal, Suryapet District (for short, ,:lie subject 2 CVBR, J W.P.No.30360 of 2024 propertyJ and the subject property was acquired by the petitioner's It is further stated that when disputes husband as ancestral ProPerty and 6s resPondent over the subject arose between the Petitioner property as 6u respondent is trying to grab the subject property of the petitioner, petitioner irled O'S'No'4 83 of 2022 and the learned Junior Civil Judge at Huzurnagar granted ad-interim injunction in favour of the petitioner restraining the respondents therein from interfering with the possession of the petitioner over the petition schedule properties till 27 .O1.2O23 uid'e l'A'No'1235 oI 2022' Thereafter' when the 6ft respondent tried to trespass into the subject land of the petitioner' she 26 of 2024 ott lodged two complaints uide Cime Nos'125 of 2022 the file of the Neredcherla Police Station and charge sheets irave been frled and the same are pending for trial' It is furthei'stated that the petitioner {iled W'P'No'2 2364 of 2023 befote this Court ""t ":"-: disposed of the said writ petition uid'e otder d'ated' 24'll'2o23 directmg the 3rd respondent therein not to interfere with the civil disputes the petitioner and respondent IIos'4 to 8 therein ln ding adjudication of O'S'No' 483 of 2022 ' It is further the 6s respondent approached the 3rd respondent by stated that whcn influencing him, he passed the impugned proceeding bearlng No.Bla94l2O24 dated 22 'lO '2024 and seized the subject property' Thereafter, the petitioner approached this Court and hled W'P'No'24856 of 2024 arrd this Court disposed of the said writ-pctition ude ordel any manner' pen pending between *1: ^nd //\ i J CVBR, J W.P.No.3036O of 2024 d,ated 21.O8.2O2.+ by granting liberty to the petitioner to submit a, application beforr-' 3'd respondent by raising all the permissible grounds along with rele'remt documents rvith a request to release the subject property from thc proceedings under Section 164 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, tsNSS,) and on filrrLg of such application, 3rd r,:spondent therein shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, strictly in accordance with law. Ii is further submitted that ie terms of the order d,ated. 21.0g.2024 passed in W.P.No.24856 of 2024, when the petitioner approached ih. 3.0 respondent, 3.d respondent did not implement the direction of this court in the sai,l order and deleted land admeasuring to zur extent of Acs. 7.2O guntas and again issued proceedings under Section 164 BNSS. The grier-ance of the petitioner is that when thr: petitioner approached the 3'a respondent and submitted a]l the doctirnents and requested him to close the proceedings undei Section 164 ol.BNSS, but having colluded with 6h respondent, 3.d respondent directed 5ft respondent to tal<e. custody of the joint family properties of the petitioner uide inrp:ugned proceedings d.ated, 22.1O.2024. Hence, the present writ petition.

3. LearneC counsel for the petitioner contended that there are civil disputes pcnding between the petitioner and 6th respondent uriCe O.S.No.483 <tf 2022 g,{ th. fiI" of learned Junior Civil ..rudge at 4 CVBR, J W.P.No.30350 of 2024 Huzurnagar and the said suit is pending for adjudication. Learned counsel further contended that unless the said suit is decided by granting decree by dividing the subject property with metes and bounds, both the petitioner and 6m :'espondent cannot claim their right over the subject property.

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue for respondent Nos. I to 4 contended that in view of the law and order problem, the 3rd respondent has rightly exercised the powers. under Section 164 of BNSS and issued the impugned proceedings dated

22.10.2024 and there is no illegality or legal infirmities warranting interference in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

5. Considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record.

6. In Kunjbihari v- Balraml, the Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically observed that if any party claims to be in possession of the property and seeks its protection, it is for that party to approach the civil Court ancl get an appropriate order and the proceedings under Section 145 of Cr.P.C cannot be allowed to be continued' ' (2006) 1 1 scc 66 5 CVBR, J W.P.No.3036O of 2024

7. Be thrat as it may, Section 164 of BNSS deals with the procedure where lispute concerning lald or water is likeh' to cause breach of peace. As per Sub-Section (1) of Section 164 of BNSS, whenever an Executive Magistrate is satislied from a reporl of a police officer or upon other information that a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace exist.s concerning any land or water or the boundaries thereof, within his local jurisdiction, he shall rnake arr order in writing, stating the grourtcls of his being so satisfied, and requiring the parties concerned in such dispute to attend his Court in persorl or by an advocate on a specihed date and time, arrd to put in written statements of their respectiv,: claims as respects the fact of actual possession of the subject of dispute It is also stated in Sub-section (4) of Ser:1ion 164 of BNSS that the Ma gistrate shall, without reference to the merits or the claims of any of the parties to a right to possess the subject of dispute, peruse the statements so put in, hear the parties, receivr: all such evidence as may 1te produced by them, take such further evidence, if any, as he thinks necessary, and, if possible, decide whether any and which of the parties was, at the date of the order made by him under sub-section (1), in possession of the subject of disputc, provided that if it appears to ttre Magistrate that any party has been forcibly and wrongfully dispos sessed within two months next before the date on which the report cf a police officer or other information.was received by the Magistrate, or after that date and before the date of his order under 6 CVBR, J W.P.No.30360 of 2024 sub-section (1), he may treat the party so dispossessed as if that party had been in possession on the date of his order under sub-section (1). As per Sub-section (5) of Section 164 of BNSS, nothing in this section shall preclude any party so required to attend, or any other person interested, from shou,ing that no such dispute as aforesaid exists or has existed; and in such case the Magistrate shall cancel his said order, and all furthcr proceedings thereon shall be stayed, but, subject to such cancellation, the order of the Magistrate under sub-section (l) shall be final. Sub-Section (7) of Section 164 of BNSS states that when any party to any such proceeding dies, the Magistrate may cause the legal representative of the deceased party to be made a party to the proceeding and shall thereupon continue the inquiry, and if any question arises as to who the legal representative of a deceased party for the purposes of such proceeding is, a1l persons claiming to be representatives of the deceased party shall be made parties thereto' As per the Sub-Section (8) of Section 164 of BNSS, if the Magistrate is of opinion that any crop or other produce of tJle property, the subject of dispute in a prcceeding under this section pending before him, is subject to speedy ald natural clecay, he may make an order for the proper custoCy or sale of such property, and, upon the completion of the inquiry, sliall make such order for the disposal of such property' or the sale-proceeds thcreof, as he thinks ht' A 7 CVBR, J W.P.Ato.3O36O of 2024

8. Since it is stated by learned counsel for both the parties that suits for partition are pending between the petil.ioner and 6u respondent an.d according to the petitioner, she is in possession of the subject propert'r' ald the said fact was crisputed by the respondents, this court is '3l 1hs opinion that ends of justice wourd be met if the parties to the writ petition are allowed to make al appropriate application on r;hs hle of the competent civil Court to establish the possession, penrling adjudication of the said suits and in the event of any order being passed by the competent civil Court declaring either of the parties in possession of the subject property, the learnecl Magistrate is directed to take into consideration of the orders being gr_anted by the competent civil C:ourt and dispose of the proceedings for handing over the possession to the respective parties. Till such time, the respondents are directed to Ib.low the procedure contemprated under section 164 of BNSS. 9 With the above observations, the Writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellare,crrs applications pending, if aly, shall stand closed. To, IITRUE COPYII 1 2 J 4 iffi fr 'r#,:fih111,i,s;l;ffi *,-*il, ' The Station House Officer, Nereducherla Police Station, Suryapet Diskict.

5. 6 One CC to SRl. RAPOLU BHASKAR, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE ,High Court for the State of Telangana at B. Trivo CCs to- GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State af Telangana, at tlyderabad [OUT] F.lyderabad [OUT]

9. Two CD Copies BM BS HIGH COURT DATED:1710it12025 \ \ ORDER WP.No.30360 of 2024 ---TEF.=?.=r-- CC TODAY ; :; Ir\ fal- y' .+\t' / .: ,) 24firf,M a * OF ,-* -:-zi' DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ,/4 4.2 tq,/s /t/