VIJAYAWADA: The Andhra Pradesh High Court on Monday came down heavily on the Visakhapatnam city police for allegedly intervening in civil disputes in the name of a Pre-Litigation Counselling Forum (PLCF), observing that counselling people while wearing police uniforms amounted to intimidating them.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Justice Lisa Gill and Justice Challa Gunaranjan questioned the role of police officials in civil disputes and warned that allowing such practices could lead to police running ‘parallel courts’.
The High Court bench directed the Visakhapatnam police and authorities not to issue notices or summon anyone in connection with civil disputes under the PLCF.
HC warns Vizag police against ‘parallel courts’
The court also sought a comprehensive report explaining under which law notices were being issued to people, the rules permitting such action and the guidelines under which the PLCF was constituted. The matter was adjourned for further hearing.
The issue came before the High Court through petitions filed by film producer Natti Kumar and businessman Manchukonda Ramakrishna, alleging that Visakhapatnam police were interfering in civil disputes and repeatedly summoning them to police stations in the name of the PLCF.
A single judge, Justice Avadhanam Hari Haranatha Sarma, had earlier examined the petitions and expressed doubts over the jurisdiction, legality, powers and limitations of the forum.
The judge directed the Registry to place the case records before the Chief Justice for consideration.
The Chief Justice subsequently directed that the matter be converted into a suo motu writ petition concerning police intervention in civil disputes through the PLCF. Senior advocate Ganta Rama Rao was appointed amicus curiae to assist the court in the matter.
During Monday’s hearing, Special Government Pleader Singamneni Pranathi, appearing for the State, submitted that police were not interfering in civil disputes and said the PLCF had been functioning since 2004 to facilitate amicable settlement of disputes. She sought additional time to place the complete details before the court.
The amicus curiae submitted that a similar forum had earlier been established by Vijayawada police but was discontinued after the High Court objected to the practice.
He said Visakhapatnam police were issuing notices in the name of the PLCF, citing Central Home Ministry guidelines. He argued that police had no authority to intervene in civil disputes and pointed out that District Legal Services Authorities were available for resolving such matters. He also informed the court that police had issued a PLCF notice even in a matter pending before the High Court.
After hearing the submissions, the bench directed police not to issue notices or summon anyone through the PLCF.