S. Sarojini, Hyderabad And 4 Others v. Secretary, Home Dept., Hyderabad And 4 Others

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. KESHAVA RAO WRIT PETITION No.27114 of 2014 ORDER:

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

The prayer sought in the writ petition is as under:- "...to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the official respondents particularly the fourth respondent for not taking suitable action against the fifth respondent and also not taking suitable action on the petitioners' complaint dated 12.08.2014 entered at page No.43 of the Register of the fourth respondent office as illegal, irregular and violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and also in violation of the provisions of the Constitution of India and pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper."

3.

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

From a perusal of the said written instructions, it is revealed that after verification of the station records, the respondent police did not receive the complaint, dated 12.08.2014, filed by the petitioner. In fact, the wife of the 5th respondent, by name, S.Anitha, lodged a complaint on 13.08.2014 against the petitioners herein stating that she borrowed Rs.1,60,000/- towards loan in the month of October 2010 at the rate of 3% interest for business purpose and paid interest amount. But the petitioners harassing her and her husband-the 5th respondent, therefore, requested to take necessary action. Pursuant to the said complaint of S.Anitha, a case for the offence under Section 420 IPC and Section 3(5)(a) of APTAMLA has been registered on 13.08.2014

against the petitioners on the file of the Hussaini Alam Police Station, Hyderabad. The allegation of the petitioners that the 4th respondent police colluded with the 5th respondent and threatened the petitioners is incorrect and baseless. Except registering the above crime against the petitioners, in accordance with law, on the complaint of the wife of the 5th respondent, the 4th respondent police never harassed, threatened and interfered with the life and liberty of the petitioners at any point of time.

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.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ P. KESHAVA RAO, J 12th December 2019 mar