High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 ol lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue any writ, order, or direction more particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, (i)Declaring the action of the Respondent Authorities more particularly Respondent No6 in issuing proceedings dL.2311212023 in furtherance to the complaint lodged by the Petitioner dt.2711o12023 vide Acknowledgment No. HYDiCCS - HYD|271O1OO353 on the file of Responder No.6 Police station as arbitrary, ultra vires, and contrary to the provisions of the code of crimin2 procedure, 1973, and set aside the same (ii)Declaring the inaction of the Respondent authorities in not registering the FIR in furtherance to the Complaint lodged dt.27.10.2023 vide Acknowledgment No HYD/CCS HYD/2710100353 00353 on the file of Respondent No.6 Police Station despite the disclosure of cognizable offence being contrary guidelines issued by the Honourable apex court in the case of Lalitha Kumar v State of Uttar Pradesh ((2014) 2 SCC 1) as being illegal, arbitrary u nconstitutional and viotative of Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently direct the Respondent authorities to consider the complaint of the Petitioner dt.2711012023 on the file of Central Crime Station (CCS), Hyderabad in consonance with the provisions of code of criminal procedure,1973. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent authorities to consider the complaint dt.2711O12023 without reference to the proceedings dt.23l1212023 issued by the Respondent No.6 pending disposal of the Writ Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI N.NAVEEN KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents Nos.1 TO 7: GP FOR HOME Counsel forthe Respondents Nos.8 & 9: SRI G.SUNDARESAN The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.8147 of 2024 ORDER: Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader lor Home appearing for the official respondent Nos.1 to 7, Sri G.Sundaresan, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.B & 9, arrd perused the record.

2. This writ petition is fiied questioning the action of the 6th respondent in issuing proceedings, dt.23.12.2023, in respect of the complaint, dt.27.1O.2O23, lodged by the petitioner, as being arbitrary, illegal, without sanction of law ald contrar;r to the provisions of Cr.P.C.

3. When the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing on O9.O4.2O25, both the counsel appearing on behalf of the I petitioner as well as the unofficial respondents submitted to this Court that there has been an amicable .settlement arrived at between the parties and they have also finalized the terms of settlement, and that the same has to be reduced into writing. ,/ "/ 2

4. Today, r.r.hen the matter is taken up for hearing, learned co::lnsel appearing for the petitioner ald the learned counsel appearing for the unofficial respondents submitted that terms of settlement has been reduced rnto lvriting in the form of Memoraldum of Understanding(MoU) on i5.04.2025, and the same is pending for sigr-ratures of the respective parties.

5. Learrred counsel for the petitioner woulcl further submit tha.t as part of the aforesaid settlement, the petitioner herein had undertaken to withdraw the allegations made against the unofficial respondenl- Nos.B & 9 and also the present Writ Petition, on both parties affixing thor signatures to the aforesaid MoU.

6. ln vierv of the aforesaid submissions made :urd taking i note of th,-- fact that the petitioner and the unofficial respondents having entered into a mutual settlement uide Memorandtrm of Understanding, dt. 15.04.2025, ald the said settlemer-rt is only pending for affixation of signatures ol the peti tioner as well as the unofficial respondents herein, u,hereby the petitioner having agreed to withdraw I 3 : : the allegations made against the unofficial respondents and also the present Writ Petition, this Court is of the view that the petitioner and the unofficial respondents are to be directed to abide by the terms of the MoU being entered into by them.

7. Subject to the above observation and direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. B. Consequently, miscellaleous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/.A. SRINIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To pul, Hyderabad. State of Telangana Station (CCS), Hyderabad. Central Crime Station (CCS), Hyderabad. ECTION OFFICER 1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad, 2. Director General of Police, Telangana State DGp Office Complex, Lakdi_ka_ 3. lnspector General of Police, Central Crime Station (CCS), Hyderabad. 4. The Dep^uty Commissioner of Police, Detective Oepiartmeht, fOW, Team -Vl, 5. The Assistant Commissioner of-Police and EOW, Team -Vl, Central Crime 6. 9ub-lnsqector of Police, Office of the lnspector of police, EOW, Team -Vl, 7. Station House Officer, Foticij St'ation, Central Crime Station (CCS), 8. One CC to SRI N.NAVF.F,N KUMAR, Advocate tOpUCl 9. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the'State of Telangana, at 10.One CC to SRI c.SUNDARESAN, Advocate tOpUCl 11.Two CD Copies "*.,$'/ 'L.- Central Crime Station (CCS), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. [OUTJ Hyderabad. t PS LS HIGH COURT DATED:1 610412025 I ORDER WP.No.8147 of 2024 -.att -*'- - pE S T/r;(: .'ll .J l1 3 0 [P11 2025 {)sI: r,AT I] DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS eq ltW