Mohamed Shiraj v. The State of Telangana

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more pa(icularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.5 in interfering into the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent Nos.6 to 8 during the pendency of the civil suit 1.A.No.263 o'f 2022 in O.S.No.'1 14 of 2022 on the file Junior Civil Judge Pargi, Ranga Reddy District, and calling to the petitioner to the police and threatening to handover the land of the petitioner's land in Sy.No.207l3 to an extent of Ac.4.'16 gts situated at Madharam Village, Pargi Mandal, Vikarabad District, and trying to dispossess the petitioner from his land, without having any jurisdiction and registering the false criminal cases against the petitioner, is highly - illegal, arbitrary, unco nstitutional and violation of Principles of Natural Justice and also in violatio,r of Articles 14,21 & 300-4 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the respondent No.5 not to interfere into the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent Nos.6 to 8 during the pendency of the civil suit 1.A.No.263 of 2022 in O.S.No.114 oI 2022 on the file Junior Civil Judge Pargi, Ranga Reddy District, not to call the petitioner into the police station and not to threaten to handover the land of the petitioners land in Sy.No.20713 to an extent of Ac.4.'16 gts situated at Madharam Village, Pargi Mandal, Vikarabad District, and not to dispossess the petitioner from his land. lA NO: 1 OF 202,5 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to direct the respondent No.5 not to interfere into the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent Nos.6 to 8 during the pendency of the civil suit 1.A.No.263 of 2022 in O.S.No.'l 14 of 2022 on the file Junior Civil Judge Pargi, Ranga Reddy District, not to call the petitioner into the police station and not to threaten to handove'the land of the petitioners land in Sy.No.207l3 to an extent of Ac.4.16 gts situated at Madharam Village, Pargi fVlandal, Vikarabad District, and not to dispossess the petitioner from his land pending disposal of the writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner:SRl A. SUHAS CHARY, REPRESENTING FOR SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 5: SRI R. LAXMIKANTH REDDY, ASST. GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.6 to 8: - - - - The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.32144 OF 2o25 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief/s:- "...ro .ssue an order or diredio\ more partiadarlg one in tlle nature of Wit oJ Mandamus declaring tlTe action of the respondent No.s in interfeing into th.e ctutl di-sputes betueen the petitioner and respondent Nos.6 to 8 duing the pendency of the ciuit suit 1.A.No.263 of 2022 in O.5.No.114 of 2022 on tle fle of Junior Ciuil Judge Pargi, Ranga Reddy Distict, and calling to th.e petitioner to the police and threatentng to lnndouer the land of the petitioner's land in Sy.No.2O7/ 3 to an ertent ol Ac.4.16 gantas situated at Mddharam Village, Pargi MandaL Vtkarabad Di.stict, and trying to dispossess th.e petitioner from his land, utithout hauing ang juisdtction and regtsteing the false criminal cases against the petitioner, is highlg iqegal, arbttrary, unq)nstitutional qnd uiolation of Principles of Constttution of lndia ond can-sequentlg direct the respondent No.S tat to interkre into the ciutl disputes between the petitioner and respondent ,Nos.6 lo 8 during the pendency of the ciuil suit 1.A.No.263 oJ 2022 in O.S.Na.1 14 of 2022 on the rtle of Junior Cluil Judge Pargi, Ranga ReddA Distict, not to call the petitioner [nto the police station and not to tlveaten lo hlndouer the land of the petitioner's land in Sy.No.2O7/3 to an extent of Ac4. 16 qlntds sihlated at Madharam Village, Pargt MandaL Vikarabad Di.strict, and nor to dtspossess the petitioner from his lqnd and to pass...'

2. Heard Mr.A. Suhas Chary, learned colrnsel representing Mr.Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petitioner and M r. R. Laxmikanth Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 5.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.5, the Station House Ofhcer, is interfering in civil disputes between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents, despite the I ) fact that such disputes are pending adjudication before the competent Civil Court. It is further a-lleged that respondent No.S has even threatened to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property and to hand over possession to tl-re unolficial respondents. Hence, the learned counsel prays th.rt this Court may be pleased to issue appropriate directions restraining such interference.

4. l,earned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing on behalf o1' respondent Nos. I to 5, submits that neither respondent N,r.5 nor any other police officer has intr:rfered in the civil disputes between the parties. It is conten(led that the allegations made by the petitioner are unsubstarl iated by any material evidence. and therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed.

5. I have perused the material placed on record and considered tl-re submissions advanced by both sides.

6. Having regard to the averments made in the petitioner's affrdavit and the settled legal position rega-rding the limited role of the police in c:ivil disputes, this Court is of the view that the \1, police authorities have no jurisdiction to interfere in purely civii matters pending before a competent court. The police are duty- bound to refrain from taking sides or disturbing possession unless acting under law{ul authorify or pursuant to an order of a competent court.

7. Accordingly, respondent No.5 is directed not to interfere in any manner with the civil disputes between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents and shall not disturb or dispossess the petitioner from the subject property. However, it is made clear that this shall not preclude the police from taking any action strictly in accordance with law, and only by following the due process of law.

8. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. SD/. A. SREENIVASA REDDY S ISTANT REGISTRAR \ //TRUE COPY' ECTION OFFICER l To, 1 . The Principal Secretary, Home Development Department, The State of Telangana. Secretariat Building, Secreianat, Hvderabad 2. The Director General of Police; Tetanqana Stat-e. Hvderabad 3. The Superintendent of Police, Vikarabad, Vikarabad District. 4. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vikarabad Division, Vikarabad District 5. The Station House Officer, Parigi, Parigi police Station, Vikarabad District 6. One CC to SRI RAPOLU BHASkAR, A--dvocate tOpUCJ 7. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Tetangana. [OUT] 8. Two CD Copies BN PVL 4'il' HIGH COURT DATED:2511012025 ORDER WP.No.32144 of 2025 ,. /< k ,J ,) ', o(l lHE S rA 0 4 rl0u na c. ParcuEo <+ I DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \ \ l\t