High Court for State of TelanganaWP/17427/2013closed no costs

Sama Sundaraiah, R.R. Dist. v. Secy., Home Dept., Hyd And 5 Ot

2019-12-03P.Keshava Rao2 pages

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. KESHAVA RAO WRIT PETITION No.17427 OF 2013 ORDER (ORAL) :

The prayer in the writ petition is as under:

"...it is prayed that this Honorable High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, declaring the action of the 5th Respondent, calling he Petitioner regularly to the Police Station and threatening him to pay Rs.6,00,000/- to the 6th Respondent without registering any crime, as illegal, void, without jurisdiction and violative of principles of natural justice, and consequently direct the Respondents 1 to 5 not to harass the Petitioner without registering any criminal case against the Petitioner..."

2. There is no representation for the petitioner.

3. Heard learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5 and perused the material on record.

4. The learned Government Pleader for Home has placed on record the written instructions dated 29.07.2013 issued by the 5th respondent - Station House Officer, Vanasthalipuram Police Station, Vanasthalipuram, Cyberabad.

5. A perusal of the written instructions reveals that the 5th respondent has never harassed the petitioner or interfered in the civil dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.6, more particularly, with regard to house plot bearing No.139, admeasuring

square yards in Survey No.141/A situated near Mahalakshminagar, Sahebnagar Kalan Village, Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy District. The allegations that on 10.06.2013, the 5th respondent had detained the petitioner in the police station asking him to pay Rs.3,00,000/- to respondent No.6 or else to face dire consequences are specifically denied stating that they are baseless. It is further stated in the written instructions that neither the petitioner nor the 6th respondent approached the 5th respondent at any point of time and as on the date of the written instructions, no case was registered against either of them. However, as a precautionary measure that if the 6th respondent lodges any complaint against the petitioner, the police should not take any action against him, the present writ petition is filed by the petitioner.

6. In the circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that there are no merits in the writ petition and the same is liable to be closed.

7. Accordingly, the writ petition is closed. No order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed.

____________________ P. KESHAVA RAO, J December 3, 2019.