Mohd. Ghouse Pasha , Ghouse, v. The State Of Telangana, Rep.By Its Principal Secretary,

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. KESHAVA RAO WRIT PETITION No.2808 of 2015 ORDER:

There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 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 Respondent No.3 and 4 in interfering in petitioner life and liberty by visiting his house, threatening him that he would be implicated in false cases and pressurizing the petitioner to act as "Informer to The Police" as illegal, arbitrary in violation of principles of natural justice and violation of Article 14, 19 and 21 of Indian constitution and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit just and proper in the circumstances of the case."

3.

Learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents placed on record the written instructions, dated 16.02.2015, issued by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Begum Bazar Police Station, Hyderabad. 4.

From the perusal of the said written instructions, it is revealed that the respondent police never interfered with the life and liberty by visiting the house of the petitioner and they have not threatened him that you would have been implicated in the false cases and the respondent police never pressurized the petitioner to act as informer. It is also specifically denied that the respondent police visited the house of the petitioner at midnight, harassed or called the petitioner and detained in the police station. It is also further mentioned in the

written instructions that the petitioner herein was involved in many criminal cases on the file of the various police stations, except the Begum Bazar Police Station. As on the date of filing of the issuance of the written instructions, no criminal case was registered against the petitioner on the file of the 3rd respondent police station. The present writ petition is filed on apprehension that if anybody lodges any complaint against him and that the 3rd respondent should not take any action against him.

5.

In view of the above facts and contentions of the 3rd respondent, 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.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand dismissed. No order as to costs.

___________________ P. KESHAVA RAO, J 14th November 2019 mar