R. Venkateswara Rao, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTI CE A.V.SESHA SAI W .P.No.4 2 3 4 8 of 2 0 1 8 ORDER: - When the matter is taken up, the written instructions furnished by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Penuganchiprolu Police Station, Krishna District, dated 26.11.2018, are placed on record by the learned Government Pleader. The said instructions read as under: - "It is submitted that as per the writ averments, the petitioner sent representation to the Superintendent of Police, Krishna District, on 22.10.2018, leveling false allegations against the Sub-Inspector of Police, Penuganchiprolu Police Station, Krishna District. It is submitted that the contention of the petitioner that the respondents Police harassed, called the petitioner to the Police Station at the instance of respondents 5 and 7 and interfered with the civil dispute, life and liberty of the petitioner is incorrect and baseless. It is submitted that the respondents Police did not interfere or harassed the petitioner by calling him to the Police Station at any point of time.

It is submitted that the petitioner prayed the Hon'ble Court to direct the respondents Police to pay Rs.2 lakhs towards compensation for harassing the petitioner is incorrect and baseless. It is submitted that the respondents Police did not harass the petitioner as alleged by him, hence the prayer of the petitioner to pay the compensation does not arise.

It is submitted that the petitioner contended that he lodged a complaint on 16.10.2018 with the 4th respondent Penuganchiprolu Police Station, Krishna District, is incorrect and baseless. As per the station records, the 4th respondent did not receive the alleged complaint.

It is submitted that the allegation of the petitioner that he shown the copy of the interim order of the Hon'ble High Court to the 6th respondent Sub-Inspector of Police, Penuganchiprolu Police Station, but he threatened the petitioner is incorrect and baseless. It is submitted that the petitioner did not approach the 6th respondent or shown the alleged copy of the order.

It is incorrect to say that the 4th respondent threatened the petitioner to implicate him and his family members in false cases, hence denied.

It is also incorrect to say that the 6th respondent detained the petitioner in the Police Station and threatened to close the puffed rice workshop within 30 days from 16.10.2018, or else the petitioner will implicate the petitioner in false cases, hence denied.

It is submitted that the contention of the petitioner that on 19.11.2018, the 6th respondent called the petitioner through staff and taken the petitioner to the respondent No.4 Police Station and detained the petitioner in the Police Station and threatened to close the work shop is incorrect, baseless far from truth and has been created for the purpose of filing the present Writ Petition. In this regard, it is submitted that the respondent No.7 K.Ramakrishna had lodged a complaint on 19.11.2018 with the respondent No.4 Station House Officer, Penuganchiprolu Police Station, Krishna District, stating that the petitioner herein abused him in filthy language and public nuisance. Basing on the complaint of the respondent No.7, a case was registered as Petty Case No.549/ 2018 dated 19.11.2018 for the offences under Section 290 I.P.C., and the charge sheet filed before the Hon'ble II-Class Magistrate, Jaggaiahpeta. In this regard, entry was made into the General Diary.

It is submitted that as per the writ averments, there is a civil dispute between the petitioner and the respondent No.7, for which the respondents Police has nothing to do. The petitioner unnecessarily involving the Police into litigation.

It is submitted that the petitioner with a malafide intention made the Sub-Inspector of Police, Penuganchiprolu Police Station in personal capacity as respondent No.6."

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of, by placing on record the said instructions furnished by the Sub-Inspector of Police, Penuganchiprolu Police Station, Krishna District, dated 26.11.2018.

Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ A.V.Sesh a Sai, J Date: 10.12.2018 smr