Shaik Aijaz, v. The State Of Telangana,

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. KESHAVA RAO WRIT PETITION No.32553 of 2014 ORDER:

The prayer sought in the writ petition is as under:- "...to issue writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of Respondent No.1 to 3 and their subordinates in interfering in the issue which are purely civil in nature at the instance of 4th Respondent is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct them not to interfere in disputes which are purely civil in nature or pass such other order or order as the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case." 2.

Learned Government Pleader placed on record the written instructions issued by the Station House Officer, III Town Police Station, Nizamabad District.

3.

From a perusal of the said written instructions, it is revealed that the respondent police have no knowledge about the marriage of the petitioner with the 4th respondent or arising of disputes between them. No case of whatsoever has been registered or pending against the petitioner in the 3rd respondent Police Station. Therefore, there was absolutely no necessity or occasion to call the petitioner to the Police Station. After coming to know about filing of this writ petition, when the respondent police enquired in the matter in nearest Police Stations in the area, it was revealed that a case in Crime No.97 of 2014 under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, dated 26.10.2014, was registered against the petitioner and two others, basing on the complaint of the 4th respondent herein. It is also further mentioned in the written

instructions that the allegations of the petitioner against the respondent police are absolutely incorrect and the same were denied. 4.

In these circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that there are no merits in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. That apart, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner on 26.12.2019. Therefore, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption 'for dismissal'. Even today also, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. From this, it appears that the petitioner is not interested to prosecute the matter diligently. 5.

Accordingly, on both the counts, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed. ___________________ P. KESHAVA RAO, J 30th December 2019 mar