APHC010193062016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3233] WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN WRIT PETITION NO: 12592/2016 Between: M. Balarami Reddy, S/o. Late Gangi Reddy, ...PETITIONER AND The State Of A P Rep By Its Prl Secretary and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. RAJA REDDY KONETI Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR HOME (AP) 2. GP FOR REVENUE (AP) The Court made the following Order: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent Nos.5 & 6. Though counter of the 4th respondent was filed, there is no representation for the 4th respondent. 2. This writ petition is filed questioning the action of the respondent Nos.2 to 6 in not taking any action basing upon the complaint of the petitioner dated 08.01.2015, 05.10.2015 and 08.11.2015 to initiate proceedings under Chapter 10 of the Criminal Procedure Code by 2 registering the crime by the 6th respondent on the complaint of the petitioner dated 08.11.2015 and to give police aid to the property of the petitioner in Sy.No.777 in an extent of Ac.1.00 situated Kaaluvapalli Village, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam District. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner is the owner and possessor of the subject land in an extent of Ac.1.00 in Sy.No.777 of Kaaluvapalli Village, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam District vide pattadar passbook bearing No.103561 with patta No.1176. (a) The grievance of the petitioner is that some of the villagers belonging to the Yadava community are burying the dead bodies in the said land of the petitioner and they are also throwing the material brought for conducting obsequies into his land. Then the petitioner made representations to the respondent Nos.2 to 5. Adjoining to his land, there is a S.C. colony. In view of the representations given by the petitioner and some others, the police officers and the revenue officials visited the place, but they did not take any action. The 6th respondent ought to have registered the crime under Section 145 Cr.P.C. for the alleged acts of mischief and criminal trespass. Since some of the villagers are using the subject land as burial ground, the petitioner is unable to protect his land. (b) On the other hand, as per the counter affidavit of the 4th respondent, the petitioner seeks protection of his property in Sy.No.777 to an extent of Ac.1.00 at Kaaluvapalli Village, Racherla Mandal, Prakasam 3 District. On the complaint given by the petitioner, the Mandal Tahsildar Racherla/the 4th respondent conducted comprehensive enquiry and recorded the statements of the villagers of all communities in the said village. As per the records, the land situated in Sy.No.777 is a settlement patta land. In that, an extent of Ac.1.00 was the ancestral property of one Mr. Muttumula Gangi Reddy who is the father of the petitioner and in that land of Sy.No.777 some extent of land was utilized by some of the villagers for their burial ground purpose. On enquiry, it was revealed that villagers belonging to Yadava community and Mala community continuously using the above said land as burial ground for the last so many decades and nobody objected for this. (c) While so, the petitioner recently tried to demolish the existing old tombs with a JCB, then all the communities felt that, it is against their sentiments and thereby objected the petitioner and consequently the demolition of the said tombs was stopped. Upon receipt of the opposition from the villagers in majority, the petitioner filed this writ petition. But the revenue officials tried to settle the matter amicably. Initially, in the writ affidavit, the petitioner shown this disputed land as situated in Sy.No.775 but he addressed to the revenue authorities stating that his land is situated in Sy.No.777. It appears, the total extent of the land is Ac.3.56 cents and in that as per the revenue records, the petitioner got Ac.1.00 in Sy.No.777. Thus, on a comprehensive enquiry conducted by the respondent Nos.3 & 4, it was revealed that it is a highly sensitive problem in the village. 4 4. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader refers to the written instructions of the 6th respondent dated 21.03.2024 and submits that, the petitioner also filed O.S.No.120 of 2017 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Giddalur and obtained interim injunction order vide I.A.No.230 of 2017 to restrain the villagers from using the said land as burial ground. The 6th respondent also registered a case in Cr.No.66 of 2018 under Sections 506, 188, 504, 447 IPC and Sections 156(3) Cr.P.C. of Racharla PS on 13.08.2018 and investigation was completed and charge sheet was also laid before the learned Magistrate on 22.01.2019 and the same is pending for the trial in C.C.No.22 of 2019 against Maadari Yacobu S/o Samuel who is shown as accused in the said case. 5. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, as the respondents considered the representations of the petitioner by conducting necessary enquiries and action has been taken as referred above, at this stage, no further orders can be passed in this writ petition, as the subject matter in this writ petition is having a nature of civil dispute for the protection of individual rights with respect to the property as claimed by the petitioner which requires consideration of the disputed facts and circumstances and examination of the witnesses before the appropriate forum. This court cannot proceed with the same and exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Since the petitioner also initiated the civil suit, the liberty is given to the petitioner to work out its remedies as per law before the appropriate forum. 5 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. _________________________ JUSTICE B KRISHNA MOHAN 05.02.2025 NNN