Shaik Abdul Synuddin v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh, Rep By Principal Secretary,
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No. 17100 of 2016 ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader of Home.
With the consent of both the parties, the writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage.
The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent Nos.3 and 4 are interfering with the civil dispute by calling the petitioner to police station every alternative day at the instance of respondent No.5.
The averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition would show that the petitioner and respondent No.5 who are brothers have partitioned the inherited properties in the year 1996 along with other siblings. It is stated that respondent No.5 and his wife by using the influence of respondent Nos.3 and 4 have been causing hardship to the petitioner. It is further stated that at the instance of respondent No.5, the police are calling the petitioner to the police station to settle the dispute with respondent No.5 and his family, failing which, they threatened to implicate him in false cases.
Though various grounds are raised, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a direction may be given to the police authorities to follow due process of law while summoning the petitioner to the police station and interfering with any dispute. Learned Government Pleader for Home submits that if the investigating agency intends to investigate, they shall do so after following due process of law.
Having regard to the submissions made and without going
into merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent - police authorities to be mindful of the limits of their jurisdiction in criminal law and not to interfere with any civil dispute, except following due process of law. Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed in the light of this final order. No order as to costs. _____________________ JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR 02.06.2016 vhb