The Telangana High Court sentenced a Miyapur Circle Inspector to four weeks’ simple imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs 2,000 after finding him guilty of wilfully disobeying judicial directions to provide police protection in a property dispute at Hafeezpet.
Published Date – 5 November 2026, 12:07 AM
By Our Legal Correspondent
Hyderabad: Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy of the Telangana High Court on Tuesday sentenced a Circle Inspector of Miyapur Police Station, M. Prem Kumar, to four weeks of simple imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs 2,000 for wilfully and deliberately disobeying the court’s directions to provide police protection to persons who had obtained a decree of permanent injunction over a property at Hafeezpet.
The court passed the orders while allowing a contempt case filed by A. Shekhar Babu and seven others, who alleged that the police officer had failed to implement the court’s earlier directions to provide police aid for protecting their possession of the property.
The petitioners submitted that they had purchased 700 square yards comprising Gokul Plots at Hafeezpet village through a registered sale deed in 2009. They had subsequently obtained a decree of permanent injunction, which was affirmed by the appellate court.
The High Court had also dismissed an application seeking suspension of the decree in the second appeal. As disputes continued over the property, the petitioners approached the High Court, which, on August 20, 2019, directed the Station House Officer of Miyapur Police Station to provide police aid for implementing the decree of permanent injunction.
Alleging that the police had failed to provide effective protection despite the subsistence of the court’s order, the petitioners again approached the High Court. On November 9, 2023, the High Court directed the Station House Officer to appear before it and explain the reasons for failing to provide police aid in terms of the earlier order.
The petitioners subsequently initiated contempt proceedings alleging continued non-compliance with the court’s directions. Opposing the contempt plea, Additional Advocate General Mohammed Imran Khan submitted that the respondent had assumed charge as Circle Inspector only on July 13, 2023, and was not aware of the earlier order until the petitioners brought it to his notice on November 7, 2023.
He further submitted that the officer had visited the property along with his staff on November 9, 2023, and instructed those carrying out construction activity to stop the work. The officer had also tendered an unconditional apology to the court and sought closure of the contempt case. However, the court observed that once the subsisting judicial order was brought to the officer’s notice, it was incumbent upon him to examine the order and take appropriate steps to ensure its implementation.
The court held that merely asserting that he had visited the property and stopped the construction activity would not establish compliance with the direction to provide effective police aid. Justice Bhaskar Reddy observed that the pendency of proceedings before a competent court did not authorise a police officer to disregard a subsisting judicial direction or substitute his own assessment of the dispute for the directions issued by the court.
Holding that the officer had wilfully and deliberately disobeyed the court’s orders, the judge declined to accept his unconditional apology and found him guilty of civil contempt under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Accordingly, the contempt case was allowed and the officer was sentenced to four weeks of simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs 2,000. In default of payment of the fine, he would undergo a further two weeks of simple imprisonment.
