High Court · 2025

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department Secretariat, Hyderabad. The Additional Director General of Police, Crime lnvestigation Department, Hyderabad. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Women Police Station, Central Crime Station, Detective Department, Hyderabad. The Station House Officer, Women Police Station, Central Crime Station, Detective Department, HYderabad. Mr. B. Rama Swamy, s/o not known to the petitioner' Sub lnspector of Police, Women Police Station, Central Crime Station, Detective Department, Hyderabad. I\,4ohd. Feroz Shareef, S/o Mohd. Yagoob Shareef, Aged about 38 years, Occ Working Abroad, F/o Near Fire Station, Hasham Nagar, Langar House, Hyderabad. o Presently residing in South Africa. Smt. Qamar Sultana, Wo Mohd. Yaqoob Shareef, Aged about 55 years, Occ ftors.*ite, Rl/o Near Fire Station, Haiham Nagar, Langar House, Hyderabad' Smt. Yasmeen Sultana, W/o Mohd. lmrat, Aged 38 years' Occ Housewife, R/o Near Fire Station, Hasham Nagar, Langar House, Hyderabad. Yousuf Sultana, W/o Sami Khan, Aged 36 years, Occ Housewife, Rl/o Near Fire Station, Hasham Nagar, Langar House, Hyderabad. 10. tt/ohammed Hameed Shareef, S/o Yaqoob Shareef, Aged 28 years, Occ - private Service, Fi/o Near Fire Statioh, Hasham Nagar, Langar House, 7 o o 6 Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lnrl a praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, thr: High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particular I one in the nature of writ of lVandamus, declaring the a) highhanded action of the respondents 4 and 5 in delayi g to register a crime against the unofficial respondents 6 to 10 and allowing th,: unofficial respondent No.6 to flee away from the country as arbitrary, illegal in violation of rules guaranteed r,rnder the Constitution of lndta b) and consequentty direct the 2nd respondent to taker appropriate steps in issuing red corner notice to bring back the respondent No. i c) direct the respondents to 1 to 3 to initiate appro )riate action on the respondents 4 and 5 for their illegal acts of delaying the r€ ( istration of F.l.R. and allowing the unofficial respondent No.6 to flee away from tr ) country. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2016 (WPMP. NO :35028 OF 2016) Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Co rt may be pleased to direct the respondent police to conduct investigation arr( arrest the unofficial respondents 6 to 1O in connection with the Crime No.4B' cf 2O16 on the file of 4th respondent, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.I.AHMED (Nor PRESENT) Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 4: SRI M.SRINIVAS, I GP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER -,..,w THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITIO N No.28281 OF 2016 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of lndia seeking the following relief/s:- "...fo lssue writ or order or direction more paftrcularly one in the nature of Writ of lvlandamus declaring the (a) highhanded action of the unofficiat respondents 4 and 5 in delaying to register a crime against the unofficial respordenls 6 to 10 and allowing the unofficial respondent No 6 to flee away from the country as arbitrary, illegal in violation of rules guaranteed under the Constitution of lndia; (b) and consequently direct the 2''d respondent to take appropriafe steps in issutng red conler notice to bring back the respondent No.6, (c) direct the respondent Nos.7 to 3 to initiate appropriate acton on tlte respondent Nos.4 and 5 for their illegat acts of delaying the registration of FIR and allowing the unofficial respondent No6 to flee away from the country; and (d) and to pass such other order or orders as this Courl may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.. ...."

2. None appeared on behalf of the petitioner

3. Heard Mr. tvl. Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, who, on instructlons, submits that the allegation made by the petitioner that, respondent Nos. 2 and 3 failed to take necessary steps to secure the presence of respondent No. 6 (accused No. 1) in the Calendar Case proceedings is wholly unfounded. lt is further submitted that the petitioner's assertion regarding delay in registration of the crime 2 and the alleged assistance extended by the reso tndent pclice authorities to the respondent No.6, in leaving t e country is devoid of any material particulars, much less credible or acceptable evidence. Therefore, it is contenc ed that the allegations are baseless, and the writ petition is liable to be d is missed

4. I have perused the material available on reccr i

5. The petitioner's grievance appears to be th: the delay in registration of the crime enabled the unofficial resp rndent No. 6 to leave the country. However, a perusal of FIR N r 481 of 2016 and the pleadings in the petitioner's own affidavit r_, reals that the petitionei' submrtted a representation on 02.08.20'1( , pursuant to which the crime was registered on 04.08.2016. Er en assuming some lapse of time between the representation and egistration of the case, the petitioner has not stated, much less r ubstantiated, the specific date on which respondent No. 6 is a I rged to have departed from the country. The mere assertion .:t facilitated his departure is, therefore, sp€( at the delay rlative and unsupported by evidence. 3

6. Further, apart from making a general allegation of delay, the petitioner has not referred to any factual circumstances or documentary evidence demonstrating mala fide intention, neg[gence, or deliberate omission on the part of the rnvestigating agency in either registering the crime or in any act facilitating respondent No. 6's departure. ln the absence of any such substantiation, the allegation cannot be accepted.

7. As per the submissions of the respondent police authorities, upon regiskation of the crime, investigation was duly conducted and a charge sheet was filed. The case was numbered as C.C. No. 40 of 2017 and subsequenfly renumbered as C.C. No. 3871 of 2014, which is now pending before the learned Xlll Additional Judicial [\/agistrate of First Class, Hyderabad. This sequence of events clearly establishes that the respondent police authorities have carried out the investigation and taken the matter to its logical conclusion by filing the charge sheet, thereby addressing the grievance of the petitioner. B The respondents have further stated that a Look Out Circular (LOC) has been issued to secure the presence of .respondent No.6 for the purpose of ensuring his appearance in 4 the judicial proceedings. The issuance of suci notice itself reflects that the investigating authorities have taken steps to bring the accused within the reach of the law. Neverthe,l rss, while the registration of the crime and filing of the, harge sheet demonstrate due completion of investigalion, t re continued pendency of the proceedings and execution c,l non-bailable warrants indicate that further legal measures, avai : ble under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for securing the, lttendance of the accused, have not yet been fully exhausted by t re concerned Court. lt is relevant to note that under Sections 82 lnd 83 of the Code of Crimrnal Procedure, when an accused pe-: on absconds or conceals himself to avoid execution of a warre may issue a proclamation requiring his appear rt, the Court tnce and, if necessary, order the attachment of his property. The se provisions serve as coercive mechanisms to compel appezr ance and to ensure that the accused is brought before the Court. 9 ln the present case, since the grievance of ttr, ,petitioner is directed against the police authorities and as the i explanation does not disclose any mala fide conduct or willful r egligence, it would be appropriate to direct the respondent policer luthorities to take all necessary and assertive steps before th I competent w , -./ ) authorities and the trial Court to secure the presence of respondent No

6. This shall include initiating appropriate proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. and pursuing all other legal remedtes available for expediting the process of securing the respondent No.6's appearance and ensuring progress in the pending case. B. With this direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of No [\Iiscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed /ITRUE COPY/I SD/. K.BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /; L7 SECTION OFFICER To, 2 J 4 5 t) The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana. The Additional Director General of Police, crime lnvestigation Department, Hyderabad The Assistant commissioner of Police, women Police statron, central crime Station, Detective Department, Hyderabad. The Station House officer, women Police Station, central crime station, Detective Department, HYderabad. One CC to SRI K.I.AHMED, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] 7 Two CD Copies BSR TKS I * HIGH COURT DATED:1411012025 ORDER rrE STAI \ ':_) ( JAN tJ2E L rr(I SPATC t \:-_E WP.No.28281 of 2016 * DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS -^ rtlV0"* : t