Baddula Komaraiah vs. D.K. Laxmi Reddy And Another
Court:High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad
Judge:Hon'ble Lalitha Kanneganti
Case Status:Disposed
Order Date:9 Feb 2023
CNR:HBHC010011012023
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Admission
Before:
Hon'ble Lalitha Kanneganti
Listed On:
9 Feb 2023
Order Text
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA : HYDERABAD
MAIN CASE NO: Contempt Case No.96 of 2023.
PROCEEDING SHEET
| SL.<br>NO | DATE | ORDER | OFFICE<br>NOTE |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03. | 09.02.2023 | LK,J | Transferred<br>to IO folder<br>before |
| This Court, by order dated 13-08-2022 in W.P.No.33947 of | making<br>corrections. | ||
| 2022, has directed the respondent police not to interfere with the civil | |||
| disputes except conducting investigation in the crimes mentioned in | |||
| the order and if the presence of the petitioners is required for the | |||
| purpose of investigation, the respondent police shall give advance | |||
| notice to them mentioning the date and time and except that they | |||
| cannot call the petitioners to the police station. | |||
| Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. B. Rakesh submits that | |||
| respondent No.2 came to the place of petitioner with 4 to 5 male | |||
| constables and one female constable in two jeeps and suddenly ran | |||
| towards the petitioner and beat him on his back, catched his collar | |||
| and dragged him into the jeep along with his wife and his son and | |||
| took them to the Police Station, Moinabad, and restrained them in the | |||
| police station till about 10.30 pm without any reason. He submits that | |||
| the petitioner and his wife were made to stand from evening to till | |||
| night near lockup area and he has also filed the photographs to show | |||
| that they were in the police station from 7-30 to 8-40 pm. He submits | |||
| that as directed by this Court, no notice was issued to the petitioner | |||
| and others before calling them to the police station and the | |||
| respondents in a high handed manner are interfering with the civil | |||
| disputes and indiscriminately beat the petitioner.<br>He submits that | |||
| when the complainant was forcibly trying to erect a container in their | |||
| land, the petitioner and his wife were objected and then, they were | |||
| called to the police station and later, the police have facilitated the | |||
| complainant to erect the said container, which is against the | |||
| injunction order passed by the Court below. | |||
| Counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of respondent No.1 | |||
| and respondent No.2. At paragraph No.5 of the counter, it is stated |
| SL. | DATE | ORDER | OFFICE |
|---|---|---|---|
| NO | that the police have received 100 dial call at 9.45 pm and on such | NOTE | |
| call, the police have visited the subject land, brought the accused to | |||
| the police station, got enquired into the matter and made a GD entry | |||
| to that effect as already crimes were registered against the accused | |||
| and the accused were warned not to indulge in such illegal acts and | |||
| notices under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., were served on them. At | |||
| paragraph No.7 of the counter, it is stated that the petitioner was | |||
| called to the police station for the purpose of investigation by giving | |||
| prior notice and at paragraph No.10, it is stated that as the accused | |||
| were absconding and evading the police, they could not serve any | |||
| notice on them for the purpose of investigation and it is stated that the | |||
| wife of petitioner and other accused came to the police station at 4.00 | |||
| pm and let off immediately after serving notices under Section 41-A | |||
| Cr.P.C. | |||
| Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that | |||
| the allegations made by the petitioner's wife that she was kept in the | |||
| police station after sunset is false. | |||
| The petitioner has filed photographs, wherein the clock in the | |||
| police station clearly shows that at about 8.40 pm, the petitioner and | |||
| his wife were in the police station. On the face of it, this Court is of | |||
| the view that the respondents in the counter affidavits have made a | |||
| false statement before this Court. | |||
| In<br>the<br>facts<br>of<br>the<br>present<br>case,<br>the<br>CC<br>Tv<br>footage | |||
| on 16-09-2022 would reveal the true facts.<br>The Honourable Apex | |||
| Court in a case where the Government of Telangana is also a party | |||
| has directed all the police stations to preserve the CC Tv footages for | |||
| a period of six months.<br>Hence, the respondent police shall place | |||
| before this Court the CC Tv footage of 16-09-2022. | |||
| Post on 16-02-2022. | |||
| The Registrar (Judicial), High Court for the State of Telangana, | |||
| Hyderabad,<br>shall<br>communicate<br>a<br>copy<br>of<br>this<br>order<br>to<br>the | |||
| Commissioner, Cyberabad Commissionerate. | |||
| ______ | |||
| LK,J<br>sj | |||
| SL.<br>NO | DATE | ORDER | OFFICE<br>NOTE |
|---|---|---|---|
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Share This Order
Case History of Orders
Similar Case Search