Jangali Sathaiah v. The State Of Telangana

HIGH GOURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF MARCH IWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION NO: 13158 OF 2022 Betwee n:

Jangili Sathaiah, S/o. Late Narsaiah, aged about 97-years, Occ. Agriculture, Fl/o Phanigiri village, NagaramMandal, Suryapet District, TS ...pETtTtONER AND

1. The State of Telangana, rep by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Building, Hyderabad.

2. The Director General of Police,, Lakdi-ka-pool, Hyderabad.

3. The Superintendent of Police, Suryapet District

4. The Sub-Divisional, Police Officer. Suryapet District, TS.

5. The Station House Officer, Nagaram Mandal, Suryapet District RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to pass an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ [\,4andamus to declare the action of the Respondent No.2, in not properly disposing of the Petitioners representation dated 2610512020 against improper investigation done by the then Respondent No.5, in this regard the Crime No.03/2018 U/Sec.420, 423 Rlw 156(3) of CRPC on the file of Respondent No.5 covered by this Honourable Court order vide in WP no.

1088812020 dated 1010812021 is illegal, arbitrary, voilative of principals of natural justice and against the article 14, 19,21 and 300-A constitution of lndia and consequently direct the Respondent No.2 to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the Respondent No.3,4 and 5 for having submitted false information to the Respondent No.2 in turn Respondent No.2 made the same stereotyped submlssion before this Honourable Court as such the Respondent No.2 is mislead by the Respondent No3,4 and 5 warranting disciplinary proceedings against them upon the Petitioner representation dated 261O512020 is the subject matter of the present writ petition vide in Crime No.03/2018 U/Sec.

file of Respondent No.5, by giving fair opportunity of the petitioner being heard and submit the relevant documents forthwith lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under section 15'1 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.2 to initiate disciplinary- proceedings against the Respondent No.3, 4 and 5 for having submitted false information to the Respondent No.2 in. turn Respondent No.2 made the same stereotyped submission before this Honourable court as such the Respondent No.

2 is mislead by the Respondent No3, 4 ad 5 warranting disciplinary proceedings against them upon the Petitioner representation dated 26losl202o is the subject matter of the present writ petition vide in crime No 03/201B U/sec 420, 423 R/w 156 (3) cRpc on the file of Respondent No 5 by giving of the petitioner being heard and submit the relevant documents forthwith pending disposal of the main writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI J.

THE HON'BLE SMT, JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI I 1VRIT PETITION No. 1 SLSa of 2o22 ORDER:

/ Questioning the action of the 2"d respondent _ Director General of Police in not properly disposing of the petitioner's representation dated 26.05.2O2O against improper investigation done by the then Station House Ofllcer - Sth respondent in Crime No. 3 of 20 18 registered for the offences under Sections 42O, 423 read with Section 156(3) Cr.p.C., this Writ Petition is fi1ed.

2.

The case of the petitioner is that in Crime No. 3 of 2018, the police have done a defective investigation and fi1ed a fina1 report stating that the case is 'civil in nature'. The petitioner therefore, made a representation to the 2"d respondent - Director General of Police to take action against the Station House Officer and when the same was not acted upon, he filed Writ Petition No. 1O888 of 2O2O, wherein this Court by order dated 10.08.2021 directed the respondents therein to dispose of the said representation. It is the further case of the petitioner that the police rvithout giving him any opportunity passed orders and in iact he initiated contempt proceedings before this Court. In the said case, the respondents

have filed a counter-affidavit which is a stereotyped history of the title of the case.

3.

Sri J. Raghuram, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Respondents 3 and 4 are in the habit of submitting false reports to Respondent No:2 as per their convenience to shield the accused and property and in this case, improper and defective investigation was done by the 5m respondent to save the accused He submits that disciplinary inquiry has to be initiated against the then Station House officer-RespondentNo'5andanopportunitybegiventothe petitioner to be heard and submit the documents' 4.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that till now, the petitioner has filed 13 Writ Petitions' He submits that in fact, the Superintendent of Police has conducted a detailed enquiry on the allegations made by the petitioner. He further submits that the Tahsildar and the Joint Collector advised both the parties to approach the civii Court for resolving their disputes, hence, the matter was referred to as 'civil in nature'. According to the learned Assistant Government Pleader, when the poiice conducted investigation and filed the final report, the remedy available to the petitioner is to lile a protest petition and he cannot approach this

Court invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, which is nothing but a pure abuse of process of 1aw.

5.

This Court has gone through the entire material available on record and the other writ petitions filed by the petitioner before this Court. The petitioner is trying to convert the Writ Court into a Magistrate Court and wants to get his grievance redressed. This Court cannot entertain such Petitions when the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy of filing a protest petition.

6.

Though this Court intends to impose exemplary costs on the petitioner for filing this Petition and wasting the precious hours of the Court, taking a lenient view, the Writ Petition is dismissed without costs.

7 .

The Miscellaneous Applications, if any shall stand automatically closed.

I SDLMOHD.SANAU LLAH ANSARI ASSIST REGISTRAR //TRUE GOPY// S N OFFICER To

1. One CC to Sri J. Raghuram Advocate IOPUC]

2. Two CCs to GP FoiHome, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

3. Two CD Copies

4. One Spare Copy MBC TRt\!-

HIGH COURT DATED: 141031202 x jHF- sIA 14:

1<'

o (.) 4,.' J .1, '1, * |)

ORDER

WP.No.13158 of 2022 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS V