High Court for State of TelanganaWP/35875/2016disposed of no costs

Smt. Akkala Devaki Rani, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh

2016-10-25Raja Elango2 pages

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO WRIT PETITION No.35875 of 2016 ORDER:

This writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India is filed seeking to declare the action of respondents 3 & 4 in harassing the petitioners by calling to the police station and demanding to settle the civil/business disputes in the police station, at the instigation of respondents 5 to 8, as illegal and arbitrary and to direct the respondents 3 & 4 not to harass the petitioners by calling them to the police station. Heard and perused the material available on record. The main grievance of the petitioners is that respondents 3 & 4 called the petitioners to the I Town Police Station, Narsaraopet, at about 11.00 a.m. and respondents 6 to 8 were also present there in the said police station. Then respondents 3 & 4 demanded to pay Rs.50,00,000/- to respondents 5 to 7 since the petitioners took leasehold rights of granite quarry.

Then the petitioners stated that they have obtained the leasehold rights legally and according to the procedure and they need not pay any money to respondents 5 to 7. Then the 4th respondent became wild and abused the petitioners in filthy language and demanded to settle the issue in the police station at their terms and conditions and threatened the petitioners that they will foist false cases against the petitioners. Thereafter, on 26.09.2016, the 4th respondent called the petitioners to the police station and illegally confined them for two days. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are praying this Court to direct the respondents not to interfere in the affairs of the petitioners.

Learned Government Pleader informed that at no point of time, the respondents, more particularly, the 4th respondent, interfered with the affairs of the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader also

informed that without there being any case registered against the petitioners, respondents 3 & 4 will not interfere in the affairs of the petitioners.

Considering the grievance of the petitioners and the submissions of learned counsel for both sides, respondents 3 & 4 are directed not to interfere with the affairs of the petitioners and respondents 5 to 8, more particularly, with the civil disputes pending between them. However, this order will not stand in the way of respondents 3 & 4 to register a case, if any complaint is lodged against the petitioners for cognizable offence.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Pending Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, shall stand closed. _________________ RAJA ELANGO,J Date: 25th October, 2016.