High Court · 2025

Mis FPL Technologies Private Limited, having its Head office situated at West Bay, Suivey No.278, Hissaa Nq. 4/Q, Pilod farm, Phase -ll, Bqneer Taluka, Haveli, Pune, Pune City, Maharashka, lndiq - 411045, Alsq Situted at No.102, Ashok Bhupal Chambers, 1st Floor, Bggumpet, Seeqdnerahad, Telangalia, Represented by its Aufhorized Signatory Sri.Jhangqvanfl $amegh $/o Sri B.Rajaguru. ,...PETITIONER AND 1 The State of.Tglangana, Homg Dqpartment, Rep by.its Principal Secretary, Secretariat, Hyderab.ad.

2. Tfle DG and Commissioqer of Police, Hyderabad 3. The Assistant Commissipnerpf Pplice, S,R .Nagar, Hyderabad. 4 The Station l-lgusg Qfficer, P.8.BorabaQqa., Hyderabad. 5. $ri.P.Vishal (umar, $/o p.Laxmqiah, Aged about 3Q Years.. Occupation. Private Job, R/o H No 8a-37A ! 2.87 ,RajNagar, Bprabanda, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS petition Under Artiele 226 o.f the Cqnqtitution of India praying that in the circumslances statgd in lhe affidavi! filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ qr Direction pr Directigns more particularly in the nature of Writ of Certifiqated Mandamug. (i) Oalling for the record of the Respondent No.4 in respect to the FIR No.155 ot 2025, daled.2310212025 and Consequently to (ii) Dirgct fhe 4th Respondent / investigating officer not to commit himself prematurely to any view of the facts for or against the petitioner or their employees and shall the investigatiqn to find out the truth and to achieve the purpose of the complaint throughout the lnquiry. (iii) Direct the Respondent No.4 to conduct investigatio r impartialy to ascertain the motive behind the compraint of Respondent No.5 (iv) r)irect the 4th Respondent to cease any unwlrranted visits to the petitioner s cffice that disrupt the business operations of the petitioner. v) Restrain Respondent |''r,.4 from arbitrary an.d unrawfur detention of petitioner l its employge nbt connecte cl with the crime alleged by the Respondent lrlq 5, granti4g Protectien from any k rr4 of harqsqry1gn1 4nd anticipqted violenc<l against tle petilionqr and its emptoyees in vievy 9f Article ?1 of Constitutipn of lndia. A o oF2 25 Petitigp Under Se()tion iS1 OpC prayi!.lg that in the circumstarCes stated in the affidavit tiled in suroort of the potition, (he High Court may ba pleased to Pending diEpgsal of thr; above writ petition regtrai4 Respondent Nq.4 from arbilrary an{ ynlaMul d(r:ention of pqtitioner / its elnployge not connected with thg prime alleged by the Ri:';pondent No,5, granting protection from ther torture gnd p l!!cinqlea yiglenctz ag a in.st thq petitiqner apd'its qrr-rploysg5. 9ggnsqf fo; !f1e Petilioner : SRt ABUtt KUIIAE S4TYAJOLU 9gynsst fo5 lhe Regpondent Nos.1 to 4 : eF FOR HOME Coqnsel for the Respondent No.5 : - Tftg C _o.qrt al the stage of admission mads fhg foltowlng OBQER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE t. VINOD KUMAR Writ Petitio n No.80 24 of 2O25 ORDER: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the admission stage.

2. Having regard to the manner of disposal of the Writ petition at the admission stage and the ,s involved, this Court is of the view that.notice to unofficial respondent No.5 is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition.

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that based on a complaint made by the 5th respondent herein, the authorities claim to have registered a case, vide Crime No.155 of 2025 on23.02.2025 against the persons named therein, who it is claimed are service providers engaged by the petitionei for the purpose of recovering the amounts due under the facility provided in the name of Federal Bank One Co-Branded Credit Card (One Card).

4. Petitioner further contends that the persons engaged by the petitioner through an agenry were required to adhere to the code of conduct prescribed by the petitioner, as the persons named in the 2 complaint misbe|raving with the de facto complainant, the authorities have terminated their s,:rvices.

5. It is also lre contention of the petitioner that notwithstanding the action taken by the respondents in terminating the services of the persons named in the r;omplaint through the agency engaged lly it, the respondenft;-;rutlrrlrities in the name of investigating into ther aforesaid crime registered a re regularly visiting the office of the petitionr:r, thereby causing interrfere rce with the business operations of the petiticner, which action it is conterrded is highly illegal and arbitrary.

6. Per L:o,ntrd, learned Government Pleader for Homr: appearing on behalf of re:sponlent Nos.1 to 4 submits that since the perscns against whom the FIFI is r-egistered have been engaged by the petitioner for the purpose oF recov(lry of amounts due under One Card, the authcrities have visited the off ce cf the petitioner for collecting information relating to the aforesaid crirne :rd did not harass or obstruct the function ng of the petltioner's opera Iions.

7. I have l.akt:n note of the respective contentions urged.

8. Having recerd to the submissions made as above, and taking note of the fact that acmittedly the petitioner had engaged the serv.ices of an agency for recovory of the amounts due to it in relation to its r:redit card business and the r;aid persons belonging to the agency engaged by the ,i a 3 T petitioner having misbehaved with the de facto complainant, who having Iodged a complaint against the said persons, this Court is of the view that the respondents-authorities are to be directed to investigate into the aforesaid crime registered and take necessary action stricfly in accordance with law.

9. Subject to above observation and direction, the Writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

10. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. I //TRUE COPY// SD/.T. JAY SREE DEPUry REG TRAR SECTION OFFICER To 1 The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat' Qtate pf Telangana 'at Hyderabad.

2. ihebG and Commissioner of Police, fy@rabad' 5. fne nssistant Commissiqner Of Police,'S'R 'Jrlagar'.Hydqrabad +. ff"," Station House Officer, P.S.Bqraban!! , f{yderabad' d. ilr; D,ci t" oe ron itiMr; ui!n cou( rb' ittp staf or relangena a! g iji'" eC i; dnt nfrurl KUMAR EATYAvPLUT Advoqate tgPucl 7. Two CD CoPieo ;$ (n- flyderEbad [OUTI / HIGH COURT DATE D: 1 8t03t?.025 ORDER YUP.No.8024 o12025 :\. 1r\- ,\ t \ ,') 01 npi zl:t * DESp 111;u,€ =t' '' DISPOSING OI] THE W.P AT THE STAGE OF ADMISSION WITHOUT COSTS. ? .> t1 ,l;