Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 763 (TS)

Nallamaddi Ravi Kiran Reddy v. State Of Telangana

2020-11-11

P.NAVEEN RAO

body2020
JUDGMENT P.Naveen Rao, J. - Heard learned counsel for petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents. 2. The facts as averred in the writ petition are as under: First petitioner claims to be working as Drug Inspector and presently posted in Warangal. He is also posted as In-charge of Jayashankar Bhupalpally District and Mulugu District. Second petition is the mother of the first petitioner. According to the first petitioner, his marriage was solemnized with Smt. Sooram Chaitanya on 10.12.2016 and is blessed with two children. First petitioner alleges that his wife started harassing him at the instance of her parents and it appears, differences arose thereafter. He alleges that on 22.07.2019 on instructions of his father-in-law, persons, by names, Suram Vasudev Reddy, Jeevan Reddy, Vijender Reddy along with Suram Karunakar Reddy assaulted him. Therefore, he lodged complaint with the Balamitra Police Station and to the Commissioner of Police, Warangal, on 23.07.2019. He further alleges that on 28.08.2020, a person, by name, Bhupal Reddy accompanied by Raghotham Reddy and six others trespassed into his residence and threatened to kill him by using very filthy language. He further submits that on 07.09.2020, Bhupal Reddy and four other anti-social elements criminally trespassed into his house at Warangal stating themselves as mazi naxalites threatened him with dire consequences to accept the demand of father-in-law to join their family on illitam basis. 3. Based on the complaints lodged by the first petitioner, Crime No.214 of 2020 was registered on 28.08.2020 in Kakatiya University Campus Police Station and Crime No.189 of 2020 was registered on 01.09.2020 in Kanchanbagh Police Station, Hyderabad respectively. He now apprehends that as there is a serious threat to his life from the anti-social elements he prays the respondent - police to provide security to him while he works in Warangal Town and also when he travels to Bhupalpally and Mulugu Districts on his official duties. He submitted a representation to the Commissioner of Police on 14.09.2020 requesting to provide him police protection. Alleging inaction on the said representation, this writ petition is filed. 4. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, there is grave threat to the first petitioner by anti-social elements at the instance of his father-in-law and therefore unless protection is granted, he cannot discharge his duties and responsibilities as Drug Inspector of Warangal District and In-charge of Bhupalpally and Mulugu Districts. 4. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, there is grave threat to the first petitioner by anti-social elements at the instance of his father-in-law and therefore unless protection is granted, he cannot discharge his duties and responsibilities as Drug Inspector of Warangal District and In-charge of Bhupalpally and Mulugu Districts. The thereat is real and therefore the police ought to have acted with urgency to provide the security to the first petitioner. 5. Per contra, according to learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, no details are furnished by the petitioners to show that the first petitioner has threat from anti-social elements as sought to be contended in the writ petition. 6. According to learned Assistant Government Pleader, there is inter se matrimonial dispute and Crime No.109 of 2020 is registered in the Women Police Station, City at Warangal, on 30.09.2020. He further submits that on the crimes reported, the police are investigating into the crimes and appropriate action will be taken in the due course. 7. Life of a citizen is sacrosanct and is entitled to seek law enforcing machinery to protect his life. However, as rightly contended by learned Assistant Government Pleader, except contending that some anti-social elements are threatening the first petitioner, relevant material is not furnished to the Police to substantiate his claim that they are the anti-social elements having criminal record and there is serious threat to his life and limb. It is not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioners that there are certain family disputes and his father-in-law is forcing/coercing the first petitioner to live with them by leaving his mother. Even in the representation submitted by the first petitioner, he went on narrating the events that took place earlier and contended that there is threat from anti-social elements. In the absence of clear details of alleged conspirators and eminent threat from Naxalites, it cannot be assumed of such grave threat to the first petitioner warranting the police initiating action to provide personal security to the individual. 8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Commissioner of Police may be directed to enquire into the representation submitted by the first petitioner and find out the truth in the allegations made by him. 9. 8. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Commissioner of Police may be directed to enquire into the representation submitted by the first petitioner and find out the truth in the allegations made by him. 9. Since two crimes were already reported by the first petitioner in which he made allegations against his father-in-law, and his henchmen, the respondent - Police are directed to examine the claim of the first petitioner as ventilated in his representation submitted to the Commissioner of Police on 14.09.2020 in the process of investigating into Crime No.214 of 2020 registered in the Kakatiya University Police Station and take appropriate steps as warranted by law. 10. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, stand closed.