Telangana HC warns police against interfering in Bhoodan land case
Justice K. Lakshman of the Telangana High Court has warned of disciplinary action, including suspension, against police personnel interfering in proceedings related to Bhoodan lands in Nagaram village, Rangareddy district.
By Legal Correspondent
Hyderabad: Justice K. Lakshman of the Telangana High Court on Tuesday cautioned that disciplinary action, including suspension, would be initiated against police personnel who interfere in the ongoing proceedings related to Bhoodan lands in Nagaram village, Rangareddy district.
The warning came during the hearing of a petition filed by Vaditya Ramulu of Padamati Thanda, who has sought the constitution of a Commission of Inquiry to investigate alleged illegal occupation of government lands by several IAS and IPS officers. The petitioner alleged that he was being threatened and pressured to withdraw the case.
Taking a serious view of the allegations, the Court directed the constable of Maheshwaram Police Station, who was accused of making an intimidating call, to appear personally before the Bench.
During the hearing, Justice Lakshman questioned the constable: “did you call the petitioner? Who instructed you to call the petitioner? Did you ask him to withdraw the petition?”
In response, the constable stated that the call was made pursuant to instructions from the Station House Officer and was related only for registering village history records. He denied any mention of the court case or any attempt to influence the petitioner.
Noting the seriousness of the matter, Justice Lakshman orally observed that any further attempt to intimidate the petitioner would result in immediate suspension of the concerned officer. He remarked that the issue involved serious allegations against senior officials and was drawing attention from across the country. Counsel for the petitioner, Dr. Vijayalakshmi, urged the Court to issue specific directions restraining the police from interfering with the petitioner.
However, the judge declined to pass such orders, stating that it was not required at this stage, while assuring that any misconduct would be dealt with strictly.
