D. Anish Kumar vs The State Of Telangana
2022 Latest Caselaw 6069 Tel

             HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY

                     WRIT PETITION No.35839 OF 2022
ORDER :

This writ petition is filed to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the

action of the 3rd respondent in not providing adequate police protection

or not deploying the police personnel to restrain the grabbers from

illegally trespassing into the petitioner's land in Plot No.1 in Sy.Nos.548

and 551 situated at Uppal Kalan Village i.e., Ramanthapur, as being

illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 21 and 300A of the

Constitution of India, and consequently, to direct the 2nd respondent to

investigate the matter taking into consideration the judgment of the

Madras High Court in A.S.V. Varadachariar v. the Commissioner of

Police1.

2. The case of the petitioner is that a suit in O.S.No.214 of 2012 on

the file of the II Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.

Nagar, was filed against him by respondent No.4. In the said suit,

respondent No.4 claimed the relief of specific performance of agreement

of sale dated 18.12.2011 in respect of the suit schedule property

consisting of Plot No.1 in M.C.H.No.16-22 in Sy.No.551, admeasuring

260.69 sq. yards situated in Uppal Kalan Village. By judgment dated

07.11.2020, the suit was dismissed on merits. The wife of the petitioner

1969 (2) MLJ 1

BVR,J W.P.No.35839_2022

lodged a report on 03.09.2022 alleging that respondent No.4 criminally

trespassed into their property and abused her and her husband

(petitioner) in filthy language and physically hurt them, based on which

First Information Report No.888 of 2022 was registered with Uppal

Police Station, Rachakonda, for the offences under Sections 447, 427,

323, 509, 354 and 201 read with 34 IPC.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent

police are duty bound to provide adequate protection and deploy police

personnel to restrain land grabbers from illegally trespassing into the

petitioner's land.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.4 submitted

that challenging the judgment passed in O.S.No.214 of 2012,

respondent No.4 filed an appeal in A.S.No.63 of 2021, wherein an

interim order was passed by this Court restraining the petitioner herein

from alienating the subject property pending disposal of the appeal.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submited that interim order was

passed for a limited period and the same is not extended.

6. However, the same is disputed by the learned counsel for

respondent No.4 contending that interim order is subsisting.

BVR,J W.P.No.35839_2022

7. In the opinion of this Court, the petitioner has not made out any

exceptional case for granting police protection or for deploying the police

personnel to restrain the alleged trespass into his land. On the

complaint made by the petitioner's wife, Crime No.888 of 2022 of Uppal

Police Station, Rachakonda, was registered. Investigation is underway.

Mere dismissal of the suit in O.S.No.214 of 2012 filed for specific

performance cannot be a ground for the petitioner to approach this

Court seeking police protection. The disputes regarding title and

possession need to be adjudicated before a competent civil court. It is

claimed by respondent No.4 that pursuant to agreement of sale dated

18.12.2011, he was inducted into possession of the subject property.

As of now, the suit filed by respondent No.4 is dismissed. There is no

interim order protecting the possession of respondent No.4. However,

as it appears there are serious disputes regarding possession over the

subject property, the petitioner should have taken appropriate steps to

file a suit for injunction and sought for temporary injunction pending

disposal of the suit. Instead of doing so, the petitioner has approached

this Court. The police have registered FIR No.888 of 2022 and

investigation is under progress. In such circumstances, it is not

appropriate for this Court to invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India and direct police protection to be

BVR,J W.P.No.35839_2022

given to the petitioner. The disputed questions of title and possession

have to be adjudicated before the civil court and it is for the civil court to

pass order of granting interim/temporary injunction and thereafter order

granting necessary police aid by invoking Order XXXIX Rule 2A of CPC

and Section 151 CPC. Without resorting to alternative remedy of

approaching the civil court by way of suit, the petitioner has directly

come to this Court.

8. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on merits, the

writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the

competent civil court by filing a suit and he may also seek temporary

injunction orders pending disposal of the suit. It is made clear the

investigation in FIR.No.888 of 2022 of Uppal Police Station shall be

conducted without being influenced by any of the observations made in

this order. No order as to costs.

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending

in the writ petition stand closed.

____________________ B. VIJAYSEN REDDY, J Date: 22.11.2022 Vv