Fatima Amoodi v. The State Of Telangana

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY WRIT PETITON No.26018 of 2018 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed with the following prayer: "...to issue an appropriate Writ, order, direction in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 4th respondent in threatening to open Rowdy-Sheet, filing of P.D.Act cases, and other Criminal cases against the sons of Petitioner namely Saud Amoodi and Ali Amoodi without conducting any enquiry, only boring grudge of preferring of FIR No.13/RCT-CR/2/2018, under Section 7 of the P.C. Act 1988 against one of its official CH Srikanth and filing of two Writ petition vide No.

26868 of 2018 and 26864 of 2018 before Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as illegal, void, violative of principles of natural justice and also in violation of Article 14, 21 & 300-A of the Constitution of India and consequently restrain the 4th respondent, from falsely implicating the sons of Petitioner namely Saud Amoodi and Ali Amoodi in P.D.Act cases and in false criminal cases just to settle personal scores and with a attitude of personal vendata and grant such other relief or relieves as the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home produced written instructions provided by Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), West Zone, Hyderabad stating that already rowdy sheet was opened against the son of the petitioner by name Saud Amood, who is A-1 in Cr.No.8 of 2018 vide proceedings NO.789/RS-Per/ACP-BH/2018, dated 06-06-2018 on the file of Banjara Hills Police Station and all together seven crimes are registered against the son of the petitioner. The petitioner approached the Human Rights

Commission (HRC) and a report is filed before the HRC by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, Asif Nagar Division and the same is pending consideration. The DCP also stated that he called 4th respondent and enquired the matter and it came to light that the 4th respondent never threatened the son of the petitioner regarding opening of rowdy sheet. The allegation of the petitioner is found to be false. It is also stated that the petitioner is in the habit of giving complaints to higher officials. Since 4th respondent registered case against the elder son of the petitioner for his involvement and recovered incriminating material evidence from their possession in connection with Cr.No.8 of 2018 and to divert the investigation agency, the present writ petition is filed.

In the writ affidavit, the petitioner has not disclosed about registration of crimes against his son. In view of the same, since the allegation of the petitioner is found to be false and the DCP, South Zone already opened rowdy sheet against the son of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction and grant equitable relief under Article 226 of Constitution of India. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. As a sequel to the disposal of this petition, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. _________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY,J 02-08-2018 Nvl