IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA & THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE NINETEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR WRIT PETITION No.34080 of 2014 BETWEEN Naseem Begum AND ... PETITIONER The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary (Department of Revenue), A.P. Secretariat Building, Hyderabad and others.
...RESPONDENTS The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Heard.
2. Petitioner alleges in this writ petition that she is a tenant in the house owned by respondent No.4 and that respondent No.3 and his officers are summoning the petitioner and her family members and forcing them to settle the said civil dispute with respondent No.4.
3. Learned Government Pleader has obtained instructions, which state that respondent No.4 is the landlord, who is stated to have let out the portion of the house bearing No.17-3-766/A, Yakuthpura, Hyderabad to the petitioner on rental basis under rental agreement, dated 02.02.2012. However, in January, 2014 respondent No.4 having came to know that petitioner’s son allegedly involved in several criminal cases, requested the petitioner to vacate the house and pay the rental arrears. It appears that respondent No.4 was threatened by the petitioner and her son even though they have illegally constructed a wall in the said house and, as such, a complaint for cheating and breach of trust was filed, which was registered as a case in crime No.191/14 before respondent No.3 police station. Instructions further say that for the purpose of investigation, notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. was issued to the petitioner to know the veracity of the complaint. Further, the allegation of the petitioner that she and her family members are harassed and were forced to settle the dispute with respondent No.4 etc., is denied.
4. Since respondent No.3 has only issued a notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., it is open for the petitioner to appear before respondent No.4 and give her statement to enable respondent No.4 to complete the investigation.
Writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. As a sequel, the miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J November 19, 2014 LMV