Peesari Mahipal Reddy vs The State Of Telangana
2023 Latest Caselaw 3070 Tel

  THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

            WRIT PETITION No.20271 of 2023
ORDER:

The case of the petitioner is that one late

Bandakunta Sajeeva Reddy was the joint owner along with

others in respect of agricultural land admeasuring Ac.8.13

guntas situated at Deveryamzal Village. While so, on

25.01.1988, a judgment and decree was passed in

O.S.No.57 1984 which was filed by the joint owners and

late Bandakunta Sanjeeva Reddy being defendant No.5 has

become the absolute owner and possessor of agricultural

land admeasuring Ac.8.01 guntas situated at Deveryamzal

Village, Shamirpet Mandal, Medchal-Malkajgiri district. It

is the further case of the petitioner that on 10.06.2004 the

Mandal Revenue Officer, Shamirpet Mandal, Ranga Reddy

District, issued a family member certificate declaring that

Bandakunta Sanjeeva Reddy expired on 25.03.2001

leaving behind his legal heirs i.e., his first wife, her

daughter, his second wife and her daughters. On

09.12.2006, the petitioner's father purchased the shares of

first wife and daughter of late Bandakunta Sanjeeva Reddy,

to an extent of Ac.4.05 guntas each in Survey Nos.700 and

791 through an agreement of sale and thus he is in

possession and enjoyment of the same.

The contention of the petitioner is that respondent

No.3, being the second of wife of late Sanjeeva Reddy, not

only started disputing the ownership and possession of the

petitioner over the land purchased from the first wife and

daughter of late Sanjeev Reddy but also trespassed into his

agricultural lands and started interfering with the

agricultural activities, which constrained him to lodge a

complaint dated 05.07.2023 on the file of the respondent

No.2, and the same was not entertained as it was civil in

nature, but basing on the false complaint lodged by

respondent No.3, FIR.No.571 of 203 has been registered

against the petitioner and issued notice under Section

91/160 Cr.P.C in C.No.571/Cr/P-1/Cyb/2023 without

making any enquiry on the petitioner's complaint.

The grievance of the petitioner is that the

respondents police are interfering with the civil disputes

between the petitioner and respondent No.3 and are

frequently summoning him to police station and forcing

him to enter into settlement with respondent No.3.

Learned counsel for respondent No.3 vehemently

contended that in fact there are disputes with regard to

partition of properties of late Sanjeev Reddy and pending

finalisation of the same, the petitioner basing on an

agreement of sale is claiming right over the property, which

is actually in possession of respondent No.3.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused

the record.

Since it appears that there are serious civil disputes

between the petitioner and respondent No.3 with regard to

the subject property, the respondents police are not having

any power or authority to interfere with the same.

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing

the respondents police not to interfere with the civil

disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.3 in

any manner. If the presence of the petitioner is required

for the purpose of investigation in Crime No.571 of 2023,

the respondents police are directed to follow the due

procedure as contemplated under law.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall

stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J 11.10.2023 JSU