Police have no jurisdiction to interfere in civil disputes, which must be resolved by the judiciary, reaffirming fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21.

ORDER:

The instant Writ Petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the following relief;

“….declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in interfering with civil dispute pending in W.P.No.12961/2013 and insisting me to withdraw the I.A.No.01/2022 at the instance of the 4th Respondent is illegal arbitrary unjust violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14, 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent not to interfere in civil dispute pending in W.P.No.12961/2013 and threaten me to withdraw the I.A. No.01/2022…”

2. Heard Sri Syam Sundar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.Sarath Kumar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, for respondents.

3. The short grievance of the Petitioner herein is that the police authorities are interfering in civil disputes.

4. The written instructions placed by the learned Assistant Government Pleader would read as follows;

“there are some disputes between both parties regarding bore existing between their lands and both parties approached the Court and suit is pending in the Court. Since the dispute is of civil nature and subjudice, so police will not interfere into the matter and both parties are advised to settle the issue before the Civil Court. Except that police are not to intervene into the civil dispute and not to harass the petitioner Vakika Adinarayana.”

5. Learned counsel for petitioner would submit that Court may pass appropriate orders recording the written instructions placed.

6. It is a settled principle of law, vide catena of decisions that the police cannot interfere into civil disputes between parties. A learned Single Judge of the then Composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh in J. Lakshmi @ Lakshmamma and another v. Commissioner of Police, Vijayawada and others, 2004 (4) ALT 175 SB held as follows;

“4. It is well settled that Police cannot interfere in civil disputes. In W.P.No.12737 of 2003 disposed of on 21-11- 2003, I have considered the question regarding the power of Police to interfere in civil disputes and coerce people to compromise civil disputes. After referring to my earlier judgment in S. Masthan Saheb v. P.S.R. Anjaneyulu , 2002(2)ALD(CRI)706 as well as the code of conduct for the Police prescribed by Union of India vide Ministry of Home Affairs Letters No.VI- 24021/97/84-GPA.I, dated 4-7-1985 and 10-7-1985, summarized the legal position as under.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that when the dispute is purely of civil nature, the jurisdiction under Art.226 of the Constitution cannot be exercised. The Supreme Court also repeatedly laid down that when the dispute between the two citizens is of civil nature and no crime is registered, police have no jurisdiction to interfere in the civil dispute. Further, when there is a civil litigation either before the court of law or before the tribunal, the police have no jurisdiction to interfere in the civil disputes, Further, when there is a civil litigation either before a court of law or before a tribunal, the police cannot interfere and even if a complaint is made in relation to such dispute pending in a civil court, the citizens have to be advised to resolve the dispute through a duly constituted court of law.

In the scheme of the Constitution of India , the duty to resolve civil disputes is entrusted to judiciary. Police have no such power. Any interference by police in a pending civil dispute or a potential civil dispute between two citizens or two groups of citizens is not within the province of the police. Furthermore, if a cognizable offence is reported to the police, it is the duty of the police to register the crime under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( Cr.P.C .) and take up investigation immediately. In a given case, even if a civil dispute, to say a land dispute, is pending before a civil court and if the quarrel between the two warring parties has a potential of resulting in a law and order problem posing threat to t