HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI WRIT PETITION No.25452 of 2022

O R D E R:

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondent No.5 in not following the directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and not following the provisions under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C in connection with Crime No.61 of 2022 on the file of Addaguduru Police Station, Addaguduru Mandal, Yadadri-Bhongiri District, as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard Mr. Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are civil disputes between the petitioner and respondent No.6 and the respondent No.6 has filed a false complaint which is registered as crime No.61 of 2022 on the file of Addaguduru Police station for the offences under Sections 324, 427 and 504 of IPC. It is stated that the respondent No.5 called the petitioner to the police station and threatened him to settle the disputes between him and respondent No.6. It is stated that the respondent police have not followed the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, [(2014) 8 SCC 273] which is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that it is the mandatory duty of the respondent No.5 to follow the directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex court in Arnesh Kumar case (stated supra). Hence, the petitioner has come up before this court.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader on written instructions submits that the crime No.61 of 2022 was registered on 02.06.2022 for the offences under Sections 324, 504 and 427 r/w 34 of IPC on the file of Addagudur police station, Rachakonda Commissionerate and they are conducting preliminary investigation and the investigation is at the threshold and that while conducting investigation, the respondent police are following the guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar case (stated supra). Hence, he prays to dismiss the petition.

6. According to petitioner, the respondent police without following the procedure as contemplated under Section 41-A Cr.P.C are calling him to the police station and threatening to settle the civil disputes with the respondent No.6. While making such a bald allegation, simple averment or allegation in the affidavit is not sufficient to prove the same and if at all the petitioner has any grievance against the erring officer, the appropriate remedy available to him is to appr oach a competent court and file a private complaint against the erring officer.

7. As far as issuance of 41-A Cr.P.C notice is concerned, even the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar case (stated supra) has not observed that the police shall issue notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C, as the discretion is vested with the police officer either to issue such a notice or for the reasons stated, he can arrest the accused. Hence, such a direction cannot be granted and in case, without following the guidelines issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar case (stated supra), if the police takes any action, the remedy available to the petitioner is to file a contempt case. Hence, the petitioner could not make out any ground for interference of this court.

8. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

_______________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J

15^th June, 2022 gvl