THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P. NO. 21694 OF 2011 Date of Judgment: 9.12.2014 Between:
Shaik Chand Miyan @ Shaik Mustafa …Petitioner And The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad and others ..Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR W.P. No. 21694 OF 2011 ORDER:
The petitioner alleges that he lodged a complaint dated 2.7.2011 with respondent No.2 for taking criminal action against the respondents 3 and 4, but no action was taken on the said complaint. Hence the writ petition.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and also learned counsel appearing for the respondents 3 and 4.
The learned counsel for the respondents 3 and 4 submits that the third respondent died long back and a memo was filed to that effect in O.S.No. 1718 of 2006 on the file of VII-Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad which was filed by the petitioner himself and the petitioner as such is aware of the same, but still no steps were taken by him to implead the legal representatives of third respondent- deceased. The statement of learned counsel for the respondents 3 and 4 is not controverted. Therefore, the writ petition in so far as it relates to third respondent stands abated and it is accordingly dismissed.
The second respondent filed a counter-affidavit stating that the petitioner’s complaint was received through proper channel from the office of Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad city and it was entered in the General Diary of the police station. It is stated that the allegations made in the said complaint were enquired and it was found that no cognizable offence was made out against the respondents 3 and 4 who are, in fact, nephews of the petitioner and there is a civil dispute pending between them in O.S.No. 1718 of 2006 on the file of the VII-Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, hence the petitioner’s complaint was found to be non-cognizable and no further action was taken. It is further stated that since the suit is pending and an interim injunction order was also granted in the civil suit, the police have no role to interfere in the said civil disputes.
In view of the aforesaid averments, I have also examined the petitioner’s complaint and I am satisfied that it does not disclose any cognizable offence and for the alleged threats and attempts of violation of interim injunction order, the petitioner has to approach the civil Court and intervention by the police in this matter cannot be invoked.
The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed along with miscellaneous applications, if any. No order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Dt. 9.12.2014 KR