THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION No.21540 of 2023

ORDER:

The petitioner claims to be the owner of Flat Nos.202, 203, 402, 403 of Syed Enclave, a residential apartment situated at Afzal Sagar, Mallepally, Hyderabad. The case of the petitioner is that respondent No.6 herein, who is the resident of Flat No.303 in the same premises, is not only engaged in disruptive behaviour and causing inconvenience and distress to neighbours by violating the rules and regulations prescribed by the Apartment Owners Welfare Association, but also monitoring every movement in the CCTV cameras installed in common areas of residential building i.e., parking, staircase, lift and corridors by sitting in his flat and circulating the videos in whatsap groups, which amounts to intruding privacy of residents of the said premises particularly female residents, which constrained the petitioner to lodge a complaint dated 14.07.2023 on the file of respondent No.5. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite receipt of the said complaint, which reveals cognisable offence, so far the respondents police have not acted upon the same.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, would submit that on similar set of facts earlier also a complaint has been lodged against respondent No.6 and acting on the said compliant, a case in Crime No.83 of 2023 was registered for the offence punishable under Section 354-B of IPC, investigation has been completed and charge sheet has also been laid against respondent No.6.

The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that respondent No.6 is frequently indulging in the activities of disturbing the privacy of the residents of the premises and also watching the CCTV recordings and circulating the videos in whatsap groups. Since the cause in the writ petition arises in different set of facts and since the persons who lodged the complaints are not one and the same, this Court is of the opinion that the respondents have to consider the complaint lodged by the petitioner by following the procedure prescribed under Section 154 of Cr.P.C as well as the guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalita Kumari v.

Govt. of U.P. and others, [(2014) 2 SCC 1]

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents police to examine the complaint dated 14.07.2023 lodged by the petitioner and if the said complaint discloses cognisable offence, they shall follow the procedure as contemplated under Section 154 of Cr.P.C as well as the guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari’s case (1 supra)

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_________________________

C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J

23.01.2024 JSU