Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 19091
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
N.Tukaramji, J
Aishwarya Kamani – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
WRIT PETITION No.4706 OF 2020
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P.Siddharth Rao, Vivek Jain
For the Respondents: P.Namratha, Vedula Srinivas, D.Pradeep
Police authorities cannot interfere with the personal life and liberty of citizens without lawful authority, and any such action must strictly adhere to the due process of law.
Headnote:The petitioners approached the court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, alleging that police authorities were interfering with their personal life and liberty based on complaints lodged by private individuals, asserting such actions were "arbitrary, unjust and violative of Article 14 and 21 of Indian Constitution." The respondents contended that the allegations were unfounded and baseless. The court examined whether the police authorities exceeded their lawful authority in interfering with the petitioners' liberty. The court observed that police powers, even during investigations, are subject to limitations and must be exercised in strict accordance with the law. With the direction to the respondent-police authorities not to interfere with the personal life and liberty of the petitioners, except in strict accordance with law and by following the due process, this Writ Petition is disposed of.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners seeking protection of personal liberty against arbitrary police interference. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. contestations by respondents regarding the baseless nature of the allegations. (Para 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. requirement for police actions to follow due process and legal limitations. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. disposal of the petition with specific directions for legal compliance. (Para 9) |
ORDER:
This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief:
“…to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent no. 3 in interfering with personal life and liberty of petitioners at the instance of complaint lodged by respondents no. 4 and 5 as being arbitrary, unjust and violative of Article 14 and 21 of Indian Constitution and consequently direct the respondent no. 3 not to summon the petitioners to the police station, Jubilee Hills in connection with complaints if any lodged by the respondents 4 and 5 now or in future and be pleased to pass....”
2. Heard Mr. P.Siddharth Rao, learned counsel representing Mr.Vivek Jain, learned counsel for the petitioners, Ms.P.Namratha, learned counsel representing Mr.Vedula Srinivas, learned counsel for respondents No.4 and 5 and Mr.D.Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present writ petition has been filed challenging the action of respondent No. 3 in allegedly interfering with the personal life and liberty of the petitioners at the instance of unofficial respondents No. 4 and 5, and seeking appropriate directions in that regard.
4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that the allegations made against the police authorities regarding unlawful interference, without any justifiable basis, are unfounded and, therefore, prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
5. Learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 4 and 5 submits that the allegations levelled against the unofficial respondents are baseless and unsupported by any material, and accordingly prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
6. I have perused the material available on record.
7. The grievance of the petitioners is that respondent No. 3 is interfering with their personal life and liberty without any lawful authority or justifiable reason.
8. Having regard to the averments made in the affidavit and the limitations on the powers of the police authorities, even in the course of investigation or criminal proceedings, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent-police authorities, particularly respondent No. 3, not to interfere with the personal life and liberty of the petitioners, except in strict accordance with law and by following the due process. Accordingly ordered.
9. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
