Y.Hanumantha Rao, Secbad And Another v. Assistant Commissioner Of Police, Hyd And 3 Ot

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S.V. BHATT W.P.No.20443 OF 2013 ORDER:

No representation for petitioners.

The petitioners pray for the following relief: ....this Hon'ble Court in the interests of justice be pleased to issue a direction, order or writ more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, a. declaring the action of the first and second respondents in not giving the necessary protection to the petitioners, in pursuance of the complaint/representation dated:

27.06.2013 as illegal, arbitrary and against the violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India; and b. Consequently direct the first and second respondents to give the necessary protection to the petitioners, in pursuance of the complaint/representation dated:

27.06.2013, by registering a. crime and taking action against the third and fourth respondents;

c. and pass such other and further order or orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case". The Assistant Government Pleader by relying on written instructions dated 26.07.2013 submits that police protection as prayed for by petitioners could not be considered by respondents for a civil dispute on title and identity of property subsists between petitioners on the one hand and respondents 3 and 4 on the other. He further submits that civil litigation is pending between the parties. By leaving it open to work out the prayers, as provided, in the pending suit, the writ petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Consequently, pending miscellaneous petitions stand closed. ____________ S.V.BHATT, J 05th December, 2017 Lrkm