High Court · 2025

2. Katakam Murali, S/O Sri Gangaram, Aged about 42 years, resident of Mannegudem, Medipalli Mandal, Karimnagar District

3. Mahesh Ankam, S/O Sri Gangaram, Aged about 33, resident of Room No. 2, Building No. 2, Gomata Nagar, Worli, Lower Parel (W), Mumbai - 18 AND 1 The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Home, Secretariat, Hyderabad. ...PETITIONERS The Superintendent of Police, Karimnagar District, Karimnagar, Telangana 2 3. The Station House Officer, Korutla Police Station, Karimnagar District, Telangana ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of .lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or a Direction, one more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring i. the action of the Respondents in harassing the Petitioners and interfering with the life and liberty of the petitioners by summoning the Petitioners repeatedly to the 3rd Respondent Police Station, without there being any crime registered, ii. illegally seizing the mobile phones, wallets, computer and car belonging to the Petitioners and iii. making the Petitioners visit the Police Station continuously for 4 days, while illegally detaining the 3rd Petitioner in the 3rd Respondent Police Station, and iv. coercing the 1st Petitioner to write a false complaint against his will as if he was cheated, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, being in utter violation of Articles 14,21 and 300 A apart from being in violation of the provisions of the lndian Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code and consequently direct the Respondents i. to return the belongings of the Petitioners consisting of Wallets, Cellular phones, Dell Laptop, Maruti Swift Car bearing No. AP 29 CC 0044 to the Petitioners ii. and further direct the Respondents not to interfere with the life and liberty of the petitioners without folloraring the due process of law. I.A. NO:1OF 2016(WP MP. NO: 35866 OF 2016) Petitiorr under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in 'the affidavit f led in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased direct the Respondr=nts to immediately and forthwith return all the belongings of the Petitioners, c')nsisting of Wallets, Cellular Phones, Dell Laptop, Maruti Swift Car bearing No. AP 29 CC 0044 to the Petitioners. pending disposat of the writ petition. co u nse I ror trre t"t' T;:';,5X,ll3lX'^'Jfr s AN D co N s u LrAN rs "ArE counsel for R:espondents:SRl G.AN|KETH REDDy,AGp FoR HoME The Court made the following: ORDER I (- THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTIGE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.28971 OF 2016 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Gonstitution of lndia seeking the following relief: "...to pass a wit, order or a direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaing the action of the Respondents in harassing the Petitioners and inbrtering with the life ancl libefty of the petitioners by summoning the Petitioners repeatedly to the 3rd Respondent Police Station without there being any crime registered illegally seizing the mobile phones, wallets, computer and car belonging to the Petitioners and making the Petitione$ visit the Police Station continuously for 4 days while illegally detaining the 3rd Petitioner in the 3rd Respondent Police Station and aercing the lst Petitioner to write a false complaint against his will as if he was cheated as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional being in utter violation of Articles 14, 21 and 300A apaft from being in violation of the provisions of the lndian Penal Cde and Ctiminal Procedure Code and consequently direct the Respondents to retum the belongings of the Petitioners cunsistr'hg of Wallets Cellutar Phones, Dell Laptop, Maruti Swift Car bearing No/AP 29 CC 0044 to the Petitioners and further direct the Respondenfs not to inteffere with the life and liberty of the Petitbners without following the due process of law and grant such other relief....-"

2. Heard Ms.K.K.Sinduja, learned counsel representing Panasia Advocates and Consultants, counsel for the petitioners and Mr.G.Aniketh Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents.

3. Leamed counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondents interfered with the life and liberty of the petitioners by illegally detaining them and seizing their mobile phones, wallets, and 2 other penlonal belongings. On that basis, the present petition was filed seeking appropriate directions from this Court.

4. Leerrned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing for the respondents, submitted that the allegations of unlawful interference with the life and liberty of the petitioners are unfounded. lt was contender! that the petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.2, 3, and 4 in Crime No.194 of 2016, and pursuant to the investigation, their presence was lawfully secured. During the course of proceedings, certain property was seized from their possession and duly deposited before th,: learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Korufla, on

14.09.2013, under Form No. 60 in D.C.1681/2016. Hence, the contentions advanced by the petitioners are without substance, and the petition deserves dismissal.

5. I ha're carefully perused the material available on record.

6. Upon consideration of the submissions advanced and the facts disclosed, it is evident that the presence of the petitioners was secured and propefty was seized strictly in pursuance of the crime proceedings. Except for the said seizure, there is no material to suggest that the respondents/police acted beyond the scope of investigation. Moreover, ' the fact that the seized property has been duly produced before the court concerned sufficiently addresses the contention of the petitioners with respe<;t to the lawfulness of the seizure. J ln these circumstances, as no merit is found in the claims

7. advanced by the petitioners, the present petition is liable to be dismissed. However, such dismissal shall be without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to avail themselves of appropriate remedies in accordance with law before the trial Court for seeking release or return of the seized property.

8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed, There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// To,

1. One CC to M/s.PANASIA ADVOCATES AND CON toPUcl sD/- u. su SISTANT-RE I ! SECTION OFFICER TANTS, Advocate.

2. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at: Hyderabad. [OUT]

3. Two CD Copies. BSK GJP /4- F HIGH COURT DATED :0210912025 ORDER WP.No.l28971 ol 2016 DISMISS}ING THE WRIT PETITION WITHOT'T COSTS n\b