Chandupatla Komra Reddy v. 1. The Superintendent of Police

Petition under A'l,icle 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 an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the inaction of the 2nd Respondent in complying with order passed by the Hon'ble ll Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal in 1.A.No.674/2013 in 1.A.No.57312013 in O.S.No.660/2013 dated 20.10.2016 and in providing necessary assistance for implementation of lnjunction Order passed in 1.A.No.573/2013 in O.S.No.66012013 dated 02.09.2013 as extended on 23.10.2013 as illegal, unjust, .arbitrary, highhanded and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to comply with the order passed by the Hon'ble ll Additional senior civil Judge, warangal in 1.A.No.674/2013 in 1.A.No.573/2013 in O.S.No.660/2013 datr d 20 10'2016 l.A. NO: 1OF 2017 (WPM P. NO: 39667 OF 201 7l Petition under section 151 CPC praying that in the , ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in supporl of the petition, the High co I t may be pleased to direct the Respondents No.1 and 2 to provide Additional nec )ssary assistance as directed by the ll Additional senior civil Judge, waranS ll vide order dated 20.10.2016inlA.No.674t2O13inl.A.No.573/2013inoSNo660/2013for implementation of the lnjunction order dated 02.09.21) 3 as extended on 23.10.2013in1AN.o.573of2013in0.SNo660of2013,p€rdingdisposalofthe Writ Petition Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. JUVERIA SANA REP SRI 1.. VENKATESH Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1,2 &6: SRI D. PRADEEP AGP FORHOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 3to5: SRI P. MEHAR Stlr \llVASA RAO The Court made the following: ORDER .i--: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No. 31837 OF 2017 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia seeking the following relief ".. .fo lssue an appropiate Wit, order or direction, more pafticulady one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus by declaring the inaction of the 2d Respondent in comptying with order passed by the Hon'ble ll Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal, in l.A. No. 674/2013 in l.A. No. 573/2013 rn O,S. No. 660/2013 dated 20.10.2016 and in providing necessary asslstance for implementation of lnjunction Order passed in lA. No. 573/2013 ,n O.S. No. 660/2013 dated 02.09.2013 as extended on 23.10.2013, as ittegal, unjust, ahitrary, highhanded and unconstitutional and consequently direct the ld Respondent to comply with the order passed by the Hon'bte ll Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal, in l.A. No. 674/2013 in l.A. No. 573/2013 rn O.S No. 660/2013 dated 20.10.2016 and pass such other order or orders..."

2. I have heard Ms. Juveria Sana, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. D. Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing for respondent Nos. '1 , 2 and 6.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are no further instructions from the petitioner and that all efforts to obtain the same have remained futile. Hence, prayed for appropriate orders be passed in the mafter. 2

4. The learned Assistant Government pleader for . ome submits that, in pursuance of the directions issued by the trial Cour in l.A. No. 674 of 2013 in O.S. No. 660 of 2013, police aid was r uly extended on

27.11.2016. lt is further submitted that the police ruthorities remain willing to abide by any further directions issued by th: competent Court, subject to compliance with due procedure of law. Hc,r rever, the learned Assistant Government Pleader denies the other allegat cns made against respondent No. 2.

5. I have perused the material available on record

6. The contention of the petitioner, as stated in the i ffidavit, is that the 2nd respondent failed to comply with the order pass< d by the learned ll Additional Senior Civil Judge, Warangal, in l A. No ( 74 of 2013 in l.A. No. 573 of 2013 in O.S. No. 660 of 20t3, with regard I : providing police protection. However, the explanation offered by the r :spondents/police authorities indicates that the said order was dul1, implemented by providing police protection on 27.11.2016, and th; the police are prepared to extend further assistance in accordance wl r any subsequent directions issued by the competent Court. Having re 1 ard to the above circumstances, and as the grievance of the petitioner he s been effectively addressed by the respondents/police authorities, tl- i ; writ petition is disposed of, reserving Iiberty to the petitioner to rvail appropriate 3 remedies before the executing Court, if a similar situation arises in the future, subject to the outcome of O.S. No. 660 of 2013. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/. M. JAWAHAR REDDY ASSISTANT REGI /fTRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Superintendent Of Police, Warangal District, Telangana State. 2. The Station House Officer, Parkal Police Station, Warangal District, Telangana State. Telangana.

3. The Principal Secretary, Home Deparlment, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad, 4. One CC to SRl. A. VENKATESH, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to SRl. P. MEHAR SRINIVASA RAO, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME ,High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

7. Two CD Copies BM t ( : t i /.t 'tt/ HIGH COURT DATED:0311112025 ORDER WP.No.31837 of 2017 I i I I I I : ri. .) (_) t' ;i ogTHE S la (; 1 | itrt 'r'l( ,)^ . i ':Sct,r.grrr) --. -:\=..:---r" .1. DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS Trt rzl"l,e @,