POLICE INTERFERENCE IN CIVIL MATTER = it is crystal clear that the respondents, on the complaint of the petitioner, registered Crime No.181 of 2020 which they are obligated to investigate in accordance with law. Except that, they have no business to either persuade or force the petitioner to enter into the settlement with his builder B. Bhujangarao in the civil disputes that are pending between them. Running the risk of pleonasm, it must be stated that settlement of civil disputes is not the cup of tea of the Police.
AP HIGH COURT
The State of Andhra Pradesh
JADA SRAVAN KUMAR
GP FOR HOME
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE U. DURGA PRASAD RAO
WRIT PETITION No.13227 OF 2020
The petitioner prays for writ of Mandamus declaring the action
of 3rd and 4th respondents in their unauthorized interference over the
construction of the petitioner’s building in Plot No.26, 9, 10 Mourya
Nagar, Kalyanadurgam Road, Ananthapuram District as illegal,
arbitrary, violative and for a consequential direction restraining them
from interfering with the civil disputes between the petitioner and his
builder B. Bhujangarao, Managing Partner.
- The petitioner’s case succinctly is thus. The petitioner is a
retired Principal and after his retirement he proposed to construct a
building at his native place and for this purpose he engaged services
of B. Bhujangarao, the Managing Partner and Consulting Engineer,
O/o. Lakshmi Constructions, Ananthapuram for construction of a
house and both of them entered into an agreement of construction
wherein specific time was stipulated for completion of construction.
(a) It is his further case that in spite of lapse of the stipulated
time, the builder intentionally delayed the completion of house
construction on one or other pretext. In the meanwhile, the petitioner
paid the total amount as agreed, but however, the builder with an
ulterior motive demanded more money and started creating troubles.
He also created obstructions in completion of the construction. On
26.06.2020 the builder and his wife came along with their henchmen
and threatened the petitioner with dire consequences and abused him
in filthy language in touching his caste.
(b) Aggrieved, the petitioner lodged a report with the 3rd
respondent/Deputy Superintendent of Police and the same is
registered as Crime No.181 of 2020 dated 04.06.2020 on the file of
Ananthapuram Police Station for the offences under Sections 420, 506
of IPC and Secs.3(1) (s), 3(2)(va) of SCs & STs (POA), 1989. Except
registering the FIR, the Police have not advanced the investigation.
Even after the registration of FIR, the accused used to threaten him
with dire consequences. Added to it, to his dismay 3rd and
th respondents instead of proceedings with the investigation in
respect of his complaint, often visiting the construction site and
openly warning the petitioner that unless he settles the case with the
builder he shall not commence the construction works.
Hence, the writ petition.
- Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned
Asst. Government Pleader for Home representing respondent Nos.1
to 4 and later denied the writ petition allegations and argued that the
respondent Police have not forced the petitioner to settle his civil
disputes with his builder.
- As can be seen from the facts, it is crystal clear that the
respondents, on the complaint of the petitioner, registered Crime
No.181 of 2020 which they are obligated to investigate in accordance
with law. Except that, they have no business to either persuade or
force the petitioner to enter into the settlement with his builder
B. Bhujangarao in the civil disputes that are pending between them.
Running the risk of pleonasm, it must be stated that settlement of civil
disputes is not the cup of tea of the Police.
- In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a
direction to the respondents to proceed with the investigation in
respect of the Crime No.181 of 2020 in accordance with law
expeditiously and at the same time without applying persuasion or
coercion to the petitioner to settle his civil disputes with his builder or
others. No costs.
As a sequel, Interlocutory Applications, if any pending for
consideration, shall stand closed.
U. DURGA PRASAD RAO, J