AP High Court raps police for intervening in civil dispute cases
VIJAYAWADA: In a significant ruling, the High Court has sharply criticised police interference in civil disputes, particularly those related to land issues, stating that they have no authority to intervene in such matters.
The HC clarified that civil disputes between individuals should be resolved through civil courts under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) or through statutory bodies like the State Legal Services Authority, District Legal Services Authority, and Mandal Legal Services Authority.
The court emphasised that police attempts to resolve civil disputes under initiatives like the Pre-Litigation Counselling Forum (PLCF) create confusion among parties and may escalate conflicts.
The HC explicitly directed Visakhapatnam police to refrain from interfering in civil cases under any pretext.
In a related case, 74-year-old S Shyamala from Visakhapatnam's Bay Colony approached the High Court, alleging harassment by the Visakhapatnam Commissioner of Police (CP), who repeatedly summoned her in connection with a civil land dispute. Shyamala sought court intervention to prevent police from pressuring her to resolve the dispute outside the legal framework.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Anchor Group director arrest illegal, holds HC
Mumbai: The Bombay High Court vacation bench on Friday declared the arrest of Anchor Group director Hemang Shah , 50, by Mumbai Police's Economic Offences Wing (EOW) as illegal, citing failure by police to produce him before a magistrate in 24 hours. The court ordered his immediate release from Arthur Road Jail. The vacation bench, comprising Justices Gauri Godse and Somasekhar Sundaresan, noted that chat messages between the wives of the two brothers supported Hemang Shah's claim that his arrest and continued custody were intended to recover the settlement amount in mediation between family members. The arrest was based on allegations of defrauding his elder brother, Mehul Shah, of Rs 67 crore. Hemang Shah petitioned the HC, arguing that his arrest was illegal since he was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours as required by law. He was detained at Delhi airport at 5.30 pm on May 17 and produced in court only at 10.45 pm on May 18. The HC agreed, stating that his arrest "without producing him before the nearest magistrate within 24 hours is completely illegal" and infringes on fundamental rights under Article 22(2), which mandates such production. The FIR by the elder brother was lodged with Malabar Hill police station in South Mumbai at 2.14 am, and a Look Out Circular (LOC) was issued at the police station's request. The dispute, being resolved before a mediator, is between Hemang on one side and his brother and their father on the other. The FIR was filed during mediation, and Hemang, scheduled to fly to Muscat from Delhi on May 17, was apprehended at the airport due to the LOC. Police stated they arrested him on May 18 after the immigration department handed him over at 4.30 am, and then he was brought to Mumbai. Senior counsel for the elder brother—the complainant—argued that the immigration officers cannot be considered police officers, and hence his custody after being "accosted" at the airport was not an "arrest" by police officers. The EOW's arrest memo states he was arrested on May 18 at 7.30 pm. The HC bench said, "In our view, the act of the Immigration Officers to accost the petitioner or detain him on 17th May 2025 at 1730 hours is the act of arrest, and therefore the period of 24 hours as contemplated under Section 58 of BNS and Article 22(2) of the Constitution of India shall begin on 17th May 2025 at 1730 hours." The High Court, however, clarified that its observations were only to decide his plea regarding his illegal arrest and would not influence the trial or merits of the case.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
SC declines to interfere with HC order on compensation to OJS examinee
Cuttack: The Supreme Court on Friday declined to interfere with the Orissa high court's direction to Odisha Public Service Commission (OPSC) to pay Rs 1 lakh compensation for procedural lapses that resulted in non-evaluation of an answer of a candidate who appeared for the Odisha Judicial Service (Main) Examination. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Jyotirmayee Dutta appeared for the OJS Main Exam 2022, results of which were declared Dec 4, 2023. She failed to qualify for the next stage by a narrow margin of five marks. Acting on Jyotirmayee's petition, the HC directed OPSC to pay the compensationto her within 60 days on Feb 13 this year. But OPSC had filed a special leave petition (SLP) in SC challenging the HC order. While dismissing the SLP, the bench of Justices Surya Kant, Dipankar Datta and Bijay Bishnoi said, "Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, we are not inclined to interfere with the cost amount awarded by the high court in favour of the respondent — a young law graduate, who is aspiring to become a judicial officer." However, the bench added, "The observations made in the impugned judgment are only in the context of the mistake detected in evaluation of one of the answers written by the respondent and the same are not to be treated as a precedent to be applied in future cases." According to case records, Jyotirmayee filed a petition in HC on Aug 27, 2024 alleging that a question in the 'law of property' paper was left unevaluated, and its marks were not added to the total. She asserted that if her answers had been properly scrutinised, the outcome of the examination would have been different, and she would have qualified for the next stage. Acting on it, the HC arranged for her answer script to be independently assessed by experts from three reputed universities. Though non-evaluation of a question was confirmed and marks were awarded for it, the petitioner did not achieve the necessary marks to pass the exam. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Accordingly, the HC dismissed the petition on Feb 13, but ordered, "However, considering the mental trauma and financial burden the petitioner has endured in pursuing this case to highlight the said lapse, this court deems it appropriate to award compensation of Rs 1 lakh to the petitioner, which shall be paid by the OPSC within a period of 60 days from the date of this judgment."
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Lalu Prasad Yadav Latest: लालू यादव को High Court से झटका, Land For Job घोटाले में खारिज हुई याचिका
ऐश्वर्या शुक्ला Authored by: | Navbharat Times• 31 May 2025, 11:10 pm Lalu Prasad Yadav Latest: लालू यादव को High Court से झटका, Land For Job घोटाले में खारिज हुई याचिका
