M JAGAN Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE KARIMNAGAR DIST

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Home.

(2.) Sri T.P. Acharya, the learned Counsel representing the writ petitioner would submit that the respondents herein had been harassing the petitioners and had been interfering with the peaceful life of the petitioners' life and the petitioners' families without any just cause whatsoever and in view of the same, the present writ petition was filed praying for appropriate reliefs.

(3.) The learned Counsel also pointed out that in W.P.M.P. No.21565/97, a direction was given directing the respondents not to interfere with the liberties of the petitioners without recourse to law and without initiating proceedings warranted by law. The learned Counsel also had taken this Court through the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and also the counter-affidavit filed by Respondents 3 and 4 and would contend that in the facts and circumstances of the case, appropriate relief may be moulded so as to protect the interest of the petitioners.