WP/27958/2005 of K.Srinivasa Chary (Managing Director) Tulasi Vishwa Vs The Station House Officer, Market Police Station, on 30 December 2005

ORDER:

Seeking a Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not investigatingthe Crime No.2/2005 dated 09.01.2005 of P.S.Market, as illegal and arbitrary, thepresent writ petition is filed.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader forHome.

The petitioner submits that he is the Managing Director of Tulasi Vishwa KarmaHome Private Limited and the said project was taken for construction of houses inand around the Hyderabad. While so, on 09.01.2005 the Asst.Sub-Inspector of Police, Market Police Station, Secunderabad, at Bata X- roads, on suspicious circumstances found one Mohd.Omer Quadri @ Saleem,S/o.Mohd.Osman Quadri in possession of one country made revolver loaded withsix live rounds and one dagger (Jambia), who is resident of H.No.16-9-401/9, OldMalakpet, Housing Board Colony, and the said person was apprehended and acase was registered in Cr.No.2/2005 for the offence under Section 25-Arms Act. It isstated that the said person was a hired gunda and on interrogation it is revealed thathe entered into an agreement with one Narasingarao to kill the petitioner in respectof land disputes. After coming to know about the said arrest of hired gunda person,the petitioner made a representation before the Commissioner of Police, Cyberabadon 13.05.2005, on which an endorsement No.594/CCC-CP/Cyb./05, dated16.05.2005 was made, requesting the Inspector of Police, Pahadisherref to takefollow up action immediately. Thereafter, the petitioner filed representations beforethe Addl.Commissioner of Police, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad as well as the DeputyCommissioner of Police, North Zone, Secunderabad and on the representationdated 03.08.2005 made before the Commissioner of Police, Basheerbagh,Hyderabad, an endorsement was made, requesting the Asst.Commissioner ofPolice, Mahankali for urgent enquiry and report. It is stated that in spite of the saidinstructions by the superior officers of police, the 1[st] respondent has not taken anyaction.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed tofile a fresh representation before the 1[st] respondent and produce all the relevantcopies along with the said representation, and on filing such representation, the 1[st]respondent may take appropriate action thereon, in accordance with law.

With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

Dated: 30.12.2005

Dsr

________________

V.ESWARAIAH,J