Telangana High Court
WP/39185/2012 of G.N.B. Choudary, S/o. Vasudeva Rao Vs The Station House Officer, on 28 December 2012
SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION No.39185 of 2012 ORDER: The relief sought for in this Writ Petition is to declare the action of the first respondent, in interfering with the disputes between the petitioner and the second respondent, and pressurizing the petitioner to give
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
WRIT PETITION No.39185 of 2012
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The relief sought for in this Writ Petition is to declare the action ofthe first respondent, in interfering with the disputes between thepetitioner and the second respondent, and pressurizing the petitioner togive post dated cheques in the name of the second respondent as beingillegal and arbitrary.
The grievance of the petitioner is that on 16.12.2012 the firstrespondent called the petitioner to Police Station and obtained a letterfrom him by force pressuring him to settle the dispute with the secondrespondent.
When the matter came up on 20.12.2012, learned GovernmentPleader for Home sought time to obtain instructions. Today the learnedGovernment Pleader, having received written instructions from the firstrespondent, would submit that as of now no complaint, whatsoever, wasreceived or registered against the petitioner on the file of KukatpallyPolice Station; the disputes between the petitioner and the secondrespondent are purely civil in nature, and the first respondent hasnothing to do with it; to settle personal scores, the petitioner has madebaseless allegations against the first respondent; the first respondenthad never interfered with the civil disputes, much less the dispute of thepetitioner herein; the allegation of the petitioner that the first respondenthad called him to the Police Station, and had obtained a letter from himby force, and had pressurized the petitioner to give post dated chequesin favour of the second respondent, is false, and is denied; and, as aprecautionary measure and to prevent the Police from taking any actionin the event any complaint was lodged against him, the petitioner hasrushed to this Court and has filed the present Writ Petition.
In view of the submissions made by the learned GovernmentPleader for Home, on written instructions, that the first respondent is notinterfering with the civil disputes between the petitioner and the second respondent, I see no reason to keep the Writ Petition pending on the fileof this Court.
Recording the submission of the learned Government Pleader forHome, the Writ Petition is closed. The miscellaneous petitions pending,if any, shall also stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________
(RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J)
28.12.2012
vs