Telangana High Court
WP/24453/2004 of M.A. Raheem, Vs The Dy. Commissioner of Police, on 30 December 2004
COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 24453 of 2004 Between: M.A. Raheem, S/o.Mohd.Khaja, age 55 years, Business,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND FOUR
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO : 24453 of 2004
Between:
M.A. Raheem,
S/o.Mohd.Khaja, age 55 years, Business,
R/o.No.319, Metroclassic Apartments, A.C. guards, Hyderabad-4.
... PETITIONER
AND
1. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, South Zone, Purani Haveli, Hyderabad.
2. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Charminar, Hyderabad.
3. The Station House Officer, Kalapattar Police Station, Hyderabad.
4. Ayub Khan S/o.Amir Ali Khan, aged about 42 years, Business, R/o.19-4-281/F/12, Nawabsab Kunta, Hyderabad.
5. Masood S/o.Mohd.Taqui Khan, aged about 45 years, Occ: Real Estate Business, R/o.19-4-278/13/4, Saleheen Colony, Nawabsaheb Kunta, Hyderabad.
6. Mohd. Kareem Khan S/o.Taqui Khan, Aged about 40 years, Occ: Business R/o.19-4-278/13/4, Saleheen Colony, Nawabsaheb Kunta, Hyderabad.
7. Shabbir, S/o.fathers name not known, aged about 30 years, Occ:Business, R/o.Tekri Biryani Shan, Nawab Saheb Kunta, Hyderabad.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to call for the records from the respondents 1 o 3 and issue an appropriate writ,direction or order more particularly one in the nature of Mandamus declaring that thefailure on the part of the respondents 1 to 3 to take an appropriate action andinvestigate the case and stop the respondents 4 to 7 and their associates fromundue interference and danger to petitioner and his family members and occupantsof the property as well as his property bearing No.19-2-21/23/A/3/1, admeasuring668 sq.yards, situated in Basharath Nagar, Nawabsab Kunta, Hyderabad, isarbitrary, illegal, capricious and violative of Articles 14,21 and 300-A of theConstitution of India, consequently directing respondents 1 to 3 to investigate andtake appropriate action against respondents 4 to 7 and their associates thwartingthem from perpetrating any illegal and high handed activities in the interests ofjustice.
Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.P.V.RAMA SARMA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR HOME
The Court at the stage of admission made the following :
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 petitioner claims that he submitted a complaint before the Court of IIMetropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, against respondents 4 to 7 and two HeadConstables, of Police Station - Kalapattar, alleging that they have assaulted him andtried to interfere with his property. On a reference made by the learned Magistrate tothe 3[rd] respondent, F.I.R.No.38 of 2004 was registered on 17-04-2004. The presentgrievance of the petitioner is that, having been enraged by the submission of thecomplaint, by the petitioner, respondents 4 to 7 and two Constables of the PoliceStation are interfering with the property bearing No.19-2-21/23/A/3/1, situated atBasharath Nagar, Hyderabad, and endangering his life, and he seeks appropriatedirections from this Court.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader forHome.
As regard the criminal acts, said to have been committed by respondents 4 to 7 and2 other constables, the petitioner had already approached the criminal Court and acase is registered. The present complaint is almost civil in nature. It is too difficult torecord any finding as to the possession over the property in question, as well as the nature of interference. The petitioner would be well advised to approach the CivilCourt and seek appropriate relief, if he faces any threat from respondents 4 to 7.
Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving it open to the petitioner to work out hisremedies in a Civil Court. It is, however, made clear that, in case there is any threatto the personal safety of the petitioner, it shall be the obligation of the respondents 1to 3, to accord necessary protection to the petitioner. There shall be no order as tocosts.
Dt.30-12-2004
_______________________
L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J.
KO
To
1. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, South Zone, Purani Haveli, Hyderabad.
2. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Charminar, Hyderabad.
3. The Station House Officer, Kalapattar Police Station, Hyderabad.
4.2CCs to G.P. for Home, High Court of A.P., High Court Buildings,Hyderabad (OUT).Hyderabad (OUT).
5.2CD copies