Poddisetti Chandra Shekar, v. The State Of Telangana,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE P.KESHAVA RAO WRI T PETI TI ON NO. 38035 OF 2014 ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.6 and the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. 2.

The prayer sought in the Writ Petition is as under: "....to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondents, respondents 3 and 4 in trying to interfere with civil disputes at the behest of respondent Nos. 5 and 6 in respect of the property i. e., plot admeasuring 600 Sq yards in Sy. No. 179 part, situated at Suraram Village, Quthbullapur Mandal GHMC Circle, Ranga Reddy District along with a room and surrounded by a compound wall and in that process harassing the petitioner by calling him to police station and making him to wait hours together without any reason and also frequently calling him and threatening him with dire consequences.

if vacant physical possession of the said property is not given to respondents and 6, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and thus violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently directing the respondents 3 and 4 not to indulge in settling civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent Nos.

consequences and also calling him on his mobile and threatening with arrest and detention ."

3.

Respondent No.3 filed a counter affidavit stating that on the basis of the complaint lodged by respondent No.6, a case in Cr.No.591 of 2014 has been registered for the offence under Sections 448 and 506 IPC on the file of Dundigal Police Station on 3.12.2014 and investigation was taken up. During the course of investigation, the complainant as well as the other witnesses were examined and their statements were recorded. When respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are taking further steps, which is part of the investigation, it cannot be interpreted as if respondent Nos. 3 and 4 are interfering with the life and liberty of the petitioner, more particularly, interfering in the civil dispute between the petitioner and respondent Nos. 5 and 6. It is further stated in the counter affidavit that respondent Nos. 3 and 4 neither harassed the petitioner nor forced him to settle the matter with respondent Nos. 5 and 6 in respect of the subject matter of O.S.No. 189 of 2014.

4.

Therefore, in the light of the statements made in the counter affidavit, for which no reply affidavit is filed, this Court is of the opinion that no further orders are required in the Writ Petition.

5.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed.

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall also stand closed. No order as to costs.

_______________ P. KESHAVA RAO,J Date: 8.11.2018 KPM