Mohd Lateef v. Superintend Of Police

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE P.KESHAVA RAO WRI T PETI TI ON NO. 26192 OF 2013 ORDER:

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2.

The prayer sought in the Writ Petition is as under: "... to issue a writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 2nd and 3rd respondent in interfering in civil disputes and also trying to dispossess the petitioner from the possession and also removing the stone pillar of the petitioner's property Sy.Nos. 239 & 327, admeasuring 1694 sq.yards (14 Guntas) situated at Park to Kothaguda, Gollaguda village, Nalgonda Mandal, Nalgonda district at the behest of the unofficial respondents, in violation of Article 14, 19 (1) (g), 21 and 3000-A of Constitution of India and also in violation of principles of natural justice. Consequently direct the respondent not to interfere with the petitioners property premises Sy.Nos. 239 & 328, admeasuring 1694 Sq. yards (14 Guntas) situated at Park to Kothaguda, Gollaguda Village, Nalgonda Mandal, Nalgonda District."

3.

The allegation made against respondent Nos. 1 to 3 is that they are interfering in civil disputes and also trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property by removing the stone pillar of petitioner's property in Sy.Nos. 239 and 327

admeasuring 1694 Sq. Yards situated at Park to Kothaguda, Gollaguda village, Nalgonda mandal, Nalgonda district. 4.

Learned GP appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3 placed on record, the written instructions received from the Sub Inspector of Police, Nalgonda II Town Police Station, stating that respondent No.5 lodged a complaint leading to registration of Cr.No.306 of 2013 under Sections 427, 447, 506 read with 34 IPC against the petitioner and one Waseem as A1 and A2 on the file of Nalgonda II Town Police Station. The matter is under investigation for want of examination of the witnesses. Except registering the above said crime against the petitioner and another, the respondent Police have never harassed, threatened or interfered in the civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

5.

Recording the said statement, this Court is of the opinion that no further orders are required in the Writ Petition. 6.

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: 6.11.2018 KPM