V. Rakesh Goud, Hyderabad v. Prl. Secretary, Home Dept., Hyderabad And 5 Others

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. KESHAVA RAO WRIT PETITION No.27730 of 2014 ORDER:

There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 2.

The prayer sought in the writ petition is as under:- "....to issue an order, writ or direction more particularly in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring action of the respondents more particularly respondents 4 and 5 in interfering into the civil dispute between the petitioner and the 6th respondent as illegal, highhandedness and violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents 4 and 5 not to harass the petitioner by calling him to police station and not to make him to sit there, and pass such other order or orders that the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case." 3.

Learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 placed on record the written instructions issued by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Jubilee Hills Police Station, Hyderabad. 4.

From a perusal of the said written instructions, it is revealed that the 6th respondent herein approached the respondent police and lodged a complaint on 12.09.2014 stating that the petitioner, who is the friend of her daughter, is doing business of travels and in the month of May, 2012, came to her house and requested to give hand loan of Rs.2,00,000/- for travel business promising to return the same within three months. In the month of June, 2012, the petitioner came to her house once again and requested for hand loan of Rs.50,000/- to purchase a vehicle for travel business. On 28.02.2013, one Mr.Syam Raj Goud, who is the brother of the petitioner, also took an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- as hand loan for purchase of car for travel business. On

PKR, J W.P.No.27730 of 2014 07.03.2013, again the petitioner taken an amount of Rs.50,000/- from the 6th respondent. On 14.08.2013, one Mr.V.Naresh Goud along with one Mr.K.Pander Raju Goud came to her house and took hand loan of Rs.50,000/- on the name of Mr.K.Pandu Raju Goud. However, they did not return the said amount. When the 6th respondent went to them to return the said amount, they abused her in filthy language and threatened her. Hence, she requested the police to give protection and recover her hand loan amount from them. On receipt of the said complaint, an entry was made in the General Diary of the Station on the same day i.e., on 12.09.2014. On conducting preliminary enquiry into the matter, the respondent police advised her to seek redressal in a competent civil Court as the dispute is civil in nature.

But no case of whatsoever was registered on the said complaint till the issuance of the written instructions. The petitioner on coming to know about the lodging of the complaint by the 6th respondent, the present writ petition is filed with baseless allegations to prevent the police from taking any action against him. The dispute between the 6th respondent and the petitioner is purely civil in nature and the respondent police have nothing to do with the same. Except advising the 6th respondent to approach the civil Court, no case of whatsoever is registered against the petitioner. It is also further mentioned that the respondent police never summoned the petitioner at any point of time and never made him to sit in the Police Station nor obtained any signatures forcibly as alleged.

PKR, J W.P.No.27730 of 2014 made baseless allegations against the respondent police. It is also further mentioned that the respondent police never interfered with the civil disputes, much less the dispute of the petitioner with the 6th respondent.

5.

In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that there are no merits in the writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.

6.

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

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed.

___________________ P. KESHAVA RAO, J 18th December 2019 mar