High Court · 2025

Judgment

6. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Secretariat, Hyderabad. The Director General of Police, Telangana, Hyderabad. The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda, Rachakonda Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, lbrahimpatnam Circle, Rachakonda Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District. Adibatla Police Station, Ranga Reddy District. The Station House Officer, Adibatla Police Station, Ranga Reddy District.

Kumbam Srinivas Reddy, Sio. Late Damodar Reddy, Aged about 52 Years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.3-9-264l2, Saraswathi Nagar Colony, Chinthalkunta, L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the F,ligh Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.5 in interfering into the peaceful life and liberty of the Petitioner and also interfering into the civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent No.6 and threatening to handover the Plot of the Petitioner through vide Plot No.87 Part, Admeasuring 140 Sq. Yards in Survey No.338, which is situated at Ragannaguda, H/o. Thurkayamjal Village, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District during the pendency of civil suit through vide O.S.Nb.166 of 2022 on the file of Hon'ble Junior Civil Judge Court, Ranga Reddy District at Hayathnagar to the Respondent No.6 is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 300-4 of Constitution of lndia and also violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the Respondent No.S not to interfere into the peaceful life and liberty and not to interfere into the civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent No.6 during the pendency of civil suit through vide O.S.No.166 of 2022 and not to threaten to handover his Plot No.87 Part, Admeasuring 140 Sq. Yards in Survey No.338, which is situated at Ragannaguda, H/o. Thurkayamjal Village, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District to construct the compound wall by the Respondent No.6. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 to direct the Respondent No.5 not to interfere into the peaceful life and liberty and not to interfere into the civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent No.6 during the pendency of civil suit through vide O.S.No.166 of 2022 and not to threaten to handover his Plot No.BT Part, Admeasuring 140 Sq. Yards in Survey No.338, which is situated at Ragannaguda, H/o. Thurkayamjal Village, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District to construct the compound wall by the Respondent No.6 pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Gounsel for the Peiitioner: SRI RAPOLU ABHINAV, REp. FOR SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 5: SRI R.LAXMIKANTH REDDY, AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.37074 OF 2025 DATE:04.12 .2025 Between: Mekam Sunitha AND The State of Telangana & Others ...Petitioner ...Respondents ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of lndia seeking the following relief: ".. .to r.ssue a writ, order or directbn, more pafiicularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaing the adbn of the Respondent ltlo.S in interfering into the peaceful life and libefty of the Petitioner and also inteiering into the civil disputes between the Petitbner and Respondent No.6 and threatening to handover the Plot of the Petitioner through vide Plot No.87 Part, Admeasuing 140 Sq- Yards in SuNey No.338, whbh is situated at Ragannaguda, fl/o. Thutuayamial Vi age' Abdutlapurmet Mandat, Ranga Reddy District duing the pendency of civil suit through vide O.5.No.166 of 2022 on the file of Honourable Junior Civil Judge Coufi, Ranga Reddy Distict at Hayathnagar to the Respondent No.6 is iltegal, aftitrury, unconstitut:anal and violation of Articles 14, 15, 21 and 300-A of Constitution of lndia and also violation of Pinciptes of Natural Justice and consequently direct the Respondent No.s not to inbrtere into the peaceful life and libefty and not to intedere into the civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent No.6 during the pendency of cMl suit through vide O-S.No.166 of 2022 and not to threaten to handover his Plot No-87 Part, Admeasuing 140 Sq. Yards in Suryey No.338, which is situated at Ragannaguda, ft/o. Thurkayamial Village, Abdullapurmet Mandal' Ranga Reddy Distict to canstruct the compound wall by the Respondent No.6......" \r - I , l 2

2. Heard Mr.Rapolu Abhinav, learned counsel representing Mr.Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Laxmikanth Reddy, rearned Assistant Government preader for Home appearing for respondents No.1 to 5.

3. Leamed counsel for the petitioner submits that, without there being any rawfur cause, respondent No. 5 has been interfering in the civil disputes between the petitioner and the unofficial respondents and has been threatening the petitioner to hand over the plot mentioned in the petition. Hence, the petitioner prays for issuance of appropriate directions against the unofficial respondents.

4. Learned Assistant Government pleader for Home, on instructions, submits that the petitioner,s husband is involved in Crime No. 7Bg ot 2025, in which he has been arrayed as accused No. 3. lt is contended that, in order to circumvent the legal process, the present petition has been filed by the petitioner. He further asserts that the respondent police authorities are conducting the investigation stricfly within the parameters of law and are in no manner involved in any civil dispute as alleged by the petitioner. lt is further submitted that the allegations made in the petition are unsupported by any material evidence. petition has been sought. Hence, dismissal of the \, 7 3

5. I have perused the material available on record'

6. The specific grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No' 5 is interfering in civil disputes between the parties' Having regard to the submissions made and the stand taken by the respondent police authorities, and keeping in view the limited role and powers of the police during criminal proceedings, respondent No' 5 is directed to refrain from interfering in the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No. 6 in any manner'

7. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of' There shall be no order as to costs' Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any' shall stand closed' //TRUE COPY// To, '1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Hyderabad, State of Telangana. SD/. C. DEEPIKA slsTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER ta at Buildings, Secretariat, :. The Director General of Police, Telangana, Hyderabad. The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda, Rachakonda Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, lbrahimpatnam Circle, Rachakonda Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District. Adibatla Police Station, Ranga Reddy District. The Station House Officer, Adibatla Police Station, Ranga Reddy District. One CC to SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD Copies

8. BSR GJP HIGH COURT DATED i A411212025 ORDER WP.No.37074 of 2025 t) t, t .T Efr S ,4 14: I E[[ E F] ET 7- <) ..: ''t i,\.:, 1, DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS 1l a\ t "( \