Jayasheela Reddy vs The Superintendent of Police and Others

A.S. Bopanna, J.—Learned Government advocate to accept notice for respondents No. 1 to 5 and file memo of appearance in four weeks. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for issue of mandamus to give effect to the Civil Court''s order dated 24.06.2013 at Annexure-A and also to provide all help and assistance to the petitioner. The fact that the petitioner herein and Smt. C.K. Devakiammal and others are involved in a civil dispute in O.S. No. 486/2013 is evident from the records. In the said suit, the plaintiffs therein had sought for injunction to protect their rights in respect of the suit schedule property. The order at Annexure-A would disclose that the injunction sought for has been rejected by the Court below.

The grievance of the petitioner is that, notwithstanding the said order, the plaintiffs therein are interfering with the right of the petitioner to enjoy the property and the Jurisdictional police are not assisting the petitioner in protecting his rights. It is in that circumstance, the petitioner contends that a representation dated 27.06.2013 as at Annexure-B has been submitted to the Superintendant of Police, Bangalore Rural District, but no action has been taken.

Learned Government advocate would point out that the police in any event cannot decide upon the property rights of the parties. It is in that circumstance, the respondents cannot be directed to protect the property of the petitioner, unless there is certain law and order'' problem in the area, where the police authorities would intervene and take appropriate action.

Keeping these aspects in view, when the petitioner contends that certain persons are causing disturbance in the area, the Jurisdictional police certainly will have to look into the grievance putforth by the petitioner and assess the threat perception to the body of the petitioner or to avert law and order'' problem and if any protection is required in that regard, the Jurisdictional police would consider the same. Hence, no opinion could be expressed at this juncture. However, a direction is to be issued to the respondent No. 4 to look into the representation of the petitioner, assess the situation and thereafter take a decision in accordance with law.

To enable such consideration, the petitioner shall now file one more copy of the representation with the respondent No. 4 who shall deal with the said representation in the manner as indicated above. The result of such consideration of the representation shall be intimated to the petitioner if any other view is taken by the respondent No. 4. In terms of the above, the petition stands disposed of.