The High Court · 2025

18. B. Srinivas, S/o. not known to the petitioner, aged.about : i years, Occ: petty Business, Rro. Hatiya vilrase, Anuhui;-M;,iii, Mts;;i; '19. Md. Haleem, S/o Mohd Khan, aged about 35 years, Occ Advocate, R/o. Sai prarhap Nasar, Hatiya villase,'A;um J, N,tliiir, rvir,s;; l,, il;iri"t* " " "

20.Bureddy Raman Reddy, S/0..Venkat Reddy, aoed about { O years, occ:Advocare, Ryo eeiioe srb J;ii, Mit;ildlou, rrrirgii iJ-o].iii"t ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndizr p,raying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the - gh cou( may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particurarry one ir he nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ decraring the actiorr of the respondents no'2 to 5 in not taking any action against the respondents no ( to 20 even though they have committed the offences, which are cognizabre a r r non-bairabre and basing on the FrR registered against them in F.r.R.No.79 0f 20 ',7, of ps Nargonda ll Town, .Nalgonda District, dated 1l_3_2017, is nothing but .: bitrary, illegal, null and void and violative of principles of natural justice and als() ,,.iolative.of Articles 14' 19 and 21 0f the constitution of rndia. consequenfly, dirs ).t the respondents no 2 to 5 to take necessary action against the respondents n( 6 to 20 basing on the F.l.R.No.79 of 2017 of pS Natgonda ll Town, Nalgonda Dist ict. LA. NO:1O F 2017(WPMP. NO: 23326 oF 20171 Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the circ r nstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may i : preased to direct the respondents No. 2 to 5 to take necessary action against the -espondents No. 6 to 20 basing on the F.l.R. No. 79 of 2017 of PS Nalgonda ll Town, Nalgonda District. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI RAJATH KUMAR PRADHAN, REPRESENTTNG SRI K. VENUMADHAV Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to 5: SRI R. LAXMIKANTH REDDY, AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 to 19:-- The Court made the following: ORDER { I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TI IKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.19143 oF 2(17 ORDER: This 'Wnt Petition is filed under Anicle 22(, c>f C_onstitution of India seeking the following relief/s:- "... to issue an order or direction more panicularly one in *e narure of s,rit of mandamus or any other appropriaL wrir declaring th,: action of the respondents no.2 to 5 in not taking any action agairst tfre res xrndents no.5 to 20 even though they have commined the offinces, whiclL ue cognizabte and non-bai.lable and basing on rhe FIR regisrered all irrst tiem in F.I.RNo.79 of 2077, of PS Nalgonda II Town, .Nalgonda )istrict, dated 17-3-2077, is noth.ing but arbitrary illegal, null and void : r I violative of principles of nanral jrxtice and also violadve.of Anicles 1,t. t9 and 2t of tlre C-onstirution of India. C-onsequentln direct the respon J rLs no.Z to 5 to alre_necessary action against the respondens no-6 to 20 rasing on the F.I.RNo.79 of 201l of PS Nalgonda II Town, Nalgonda Di; ocr,.... ."

2. Fleard Mr.Rajath Kumar Pradhan, I: .rned counsel representing Mr.K.Venumadhav, leamed counsel {< r the peritioner and Mr.Rlaxmikanth Reddy, leamed Assistar. Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondenr Nos.1 r ) 5.

3. Leamed counsel for the petitioner st l ,rnits that as questioning the inaction on rhe part of responderr Nos.2 to 5 in taking action againsr the unofficial respondents,/re s pondent Nos.6 to 20 in Crime No.79 of 20L7, seeking appropriate c irection against petition was filed. T,.* ,b ? I I \ I 2

4. Leamed Assistant Govemment pleader for Flome would submit rhar, thus, the crime No.z9 of 2or7 was investfated, thereafter, final report endoning 'lack of evidence, was filed before the Judicial Ivlagistrate of First Class, Nalgonda on 06.07.201g, the contenrion raised bythe petitioner does not survive.

5. I have pen:sed the materials on recorrd.

6. Flaving regard to the prayer of the pedrioner and the developments reponed by the leamed Assistant Govemment Pleader, this Court is of the considered view that nothing funher survives for adjudication in this mamer. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. 1 I Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPYII SD/-A.V.S.PRAS D UTY REG R S TION OFFICER To, '1. One CC to Sri K. Venur ' Ilo""P,"o?l"r""f,i ;ff Til ;ffi ::

3. Two CD Copies j:::":j TJ Telangana. at ", HIGH COURT DATED:1710912025 ORDER WP.No.19143 ot 2012 \ -:.:=-;- , lTtiE S I.q A (t o -r, * \ ' 9 irA ?ttt: I i st: ^ *t ,i' P4rcFlf.,l.. ::':- :::;:r. . DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS b I Dh \ t I'