High Court · 2025

6. Kashireddy Srinivas Reddy, S/o K. Venkat Reddy, aged about 64 years' Occ' " ;G;;ii;;d, nvo. tr.rlo z:+,'bEoori viitug"' Telafallv Mandal, Nasar-Kurnool District.

7. Kashireddy Vinod Reddy, S/o K. Srinivas Reddy,.aged about.36 yeers' Occ' ' iilil;;;.,R6. H. r'ro z-d,' p6oour Vittase, Telapallv Mandal, Nasar-Kurnool District.

8. KashireddY Naveen ReddY, Software EmPloYee, Fl/o. H. Kumool District. S/o K. Srinivas Reddy, aged about 34 years, Occ No 2-4, Peddur Villag'e, TelaBally Mandal, Nagar- .....RESPONDENTS Petition Under Article 226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus decrraring the action of the Respondent No.3 in n,cn-foilowing ihe provisions of 17314) of BNSS Act 2023 (old criminal procedure code Section 15a (3) crPC) ancr non-initiating to register the FIR and non-initiating to take the necessary action against the Respondent No. 6 to g and others by registering the criminal case, wh. hatched a pran to extract the money from the petitioner by stating the sweet words and sold the disputed land and cheated the petitioner and thereupon as the petitioner questioned the same, the Respondent No. 6 to B attacked on the Pr:titioner and created panic situation and threatened with dire consequences is highly illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of Articles 14' 15 and 21 of the constitution of rndia and arso vioration of the principres of Natural Justice and consequenfly direct the Respondenr No.3 to fofiow the provisions of the I 73(4) of BNSS Act 2023 (old criminat procedure code section 15a (3) crPC) and to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 07 -02-2025 and to register the Fir against the Respondent No. 6 to 8, and take the necessary acti.n against them, who went to the house of the petitioner and attacked on him and abused the petitioner and brackmaired the petitioner with dire consequences by creating panic situation. !.A.NO:'l OF 2025 Petition Underr Section 15'r cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to direct the Respondent No. 3 to foilow the provisions of the 173(4) of BNSS Act 2023 (old criminar Procedure code section 154 (3) crpc) and tc, consider the representation of the petitioner dated 07 _02_2025 and to register the Fir against the Respondent No 6 to g, and take the necessary action against them, who went to the house of the petitioner and attacked on him and abused the Petitioner and brackmaired the petitioner with dire consequences by creating panic situation, pending disposal of writ petition. Counsel for the petitioner : SRI RAPOLU BHASKAR counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5 : sRl M.sRrNrvAs, AGp FoR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 to g : _ The Court made the following ORDER HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY WRIT PETITIO N No.4974 0F 2025 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner aggrieved by the action of respondent No.3, in not registering the First lnformation Report on his complaint made against respondent Nos.6 to 8, as being contrary to Section 173 (4) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia'

2. Heard Mr. Rapolu Bhaskar, learned counsel for the petitioner' andMr.M.Srinivas,learnedAssistantGovernmentPleaderforHome; and perused the material available on record.

3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home placed on record the written instructions and submitted that on complaint lodged by the petitioner, General Diary entry was made on 11 01 '2025 ln the enquiry, it was revealed that respondent No'6 has shown some plots in Survey Nos.18, 18/U, 19, h'l9u and 20/u situated at Bhongulur Village' lbrahimpatnamMandal,tothepetitionerandaccordinglythepetitioner agreed to purchase the said plots for a sum of Rs'2'40 crores The I I petitioner paid Rs.10.00 lakhs as advance and entered into agreement of sale with respondent No.6' Subsequently' the petitioner came to ) know that some unknown persons have damaged the plot links and there are civil cases on the said prots between respondent No.6 and one Mohan Reddy. The petitioner requested respondent No.6 to refund the advance amount, but respondent No.6 failed to repay the amount. The dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.6 reiates to money transaction, which is purely civil in nature, as such, the complaint of the petitioner was closed as ,civil in nature,. A copy of the written instructions along with notice, intimating the petitioner about the closure of his compraint, is served on the learned counser for the petitioner.

4. ln view of the above, no further orders are required to be passed and the writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. The petitioner is granted liberty to invoke appropriate remedy in accordance with raw. No order as to rlosts. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the writ petition stand closed. To //TRUE COPY// SD/-T. TIRUMALA DEVI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR )trt"s \-:: =--'. ECTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Secretariat Buildings, State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

2. The Director General of Police, Telangana State, Hyderabad. 3. The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda Commissionerate. 4. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, L.B. Nagar, Rachakonda Commissionerate.

5. The Station House Officer, Chaitanyapuri Police Station, Rachakonda Commissionerate.

6. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME ,High Court forthe State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

7. One CC to SR.l RAPOLU BHASKAR, Advocate [OPUC,] 8. Two CD Copies b SA *rl I tiE Sl4 14: 1 'a o( i '-.) \i: \ )," t 2 5 FEB 2025 C) D€ s A -t gO HIGH COURT DATE D: 1 910212025 ORDER WP.No.4974 ot 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P i.9 WITHOUT COSTS. Oc"g- 2S L ld