Telangana High Court
WP/24866/2004 of Inala Bhaskar Rao, Vs Director General Of Police, on 30 December 2004
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 24866 of 2004 Between: Inala Bhaskar Rao, S/o. Veeracharyulu, R/o. Avanigadda,
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.
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 SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO : 24866 of 2004
Between:
Inala Bhaskar Rao, S/o. Veeracharyulu,
R/o. Avanigadda, Krishna District.
..... PETITIONER
AND
1 Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarters, Hyderabad.
2 Sub-Inspector of Police, Avanigadda Police Station, Avanigadda, Krishna District.
.....RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in thecircumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleasedto call for the records and issue a writ or order or direction more particularlyone in the nature of Writ of Mandamus and declare the action of the 2ndrespondent in harassing the petitioner by interfering with the life and liberty ofthe petitioner is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 21 of theConstitution of India apart from being violation of the principles of NaturalJustice and consequently direct the 2nd respondent not to harass the petitionerwithout there being any crime registered against the petitioner.
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.VENKATA RANGADAS KANURI
Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR HOME
The Court at the admission stage made the following ORDER:
Petitioner alleges that the respondents, in particular the Station House Officerconcerned are requiring him to attend the police station indiscriminately andharassing him day-in and day-out. It is also alleged that no complaints havebeen filed against him, much less any case was registered. He seeksappropriate directions for protection of his rights and liberty.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader forHome.
The police authorities are vested with the power as well as the duty to protectthe law & order in the society and to investigate into the complaints wheneverthey are received or as and when any crime is noticed by themselves. Anyaction against the citizen by the police can be on the basis of a complaintreceived against him and after registration of the case. There does not existany basis for indiscriminate interference with the rights and liberty of citizens,in the absence of any specific complaint or registered case. Such action wouldamount to infringement of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 ofthe Constitution of India. The petitioner alleges that even in the absence of anycomplaint and case registered against him, he is being required by the police toattend the police station.
Hence, the writ petition is disposed of directing that the respondents shall notinsist on the petitioner to attend the police station or to interfere with his rights,except where any specific complaint is received or any case is registeredagainst him. There shall be no order as to costs.
-----------------------
ksld
To
1 Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarters, Hyderabad.
2 Sub-Inspector of Police, Avanigadda Police Station, Avanigadda, Krishna District.
3 2CCs to the G.P.for Home, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad. (OUT)
4 2 CD copies.