Swarna Sambaiah Chowdary @ Sebastian v. 'l . The State of Telangana

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring the action of the respondent No.4 in not registering a crime against the Board of Directors of the Bharat Bible college society Dabilpur, Medchal, Medchal Malkajgiri district who cheated the Registrar of the societies with fraudulent documents and forgery signatures for renewal/Amenders for issue the bogus degrees for the students and also illegal sale of the society property at Secunderabad basing on the complaint dated 6-2- 2025 having received the complaint by the 4th respondent is illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the provisions of 173, 174, 175 and 176 of BNSS. and also contrary to the settled principle of taw laid down by the constitutional courls and consequently direct the respondents to register the crime against the Board of Directors of the Bharat Bible College society on the compliant of the petitioner dated 6- 2-2025 received by the 4th respondent forthwith. I.A.NO:1 OF 2025 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 respondents to register the complaint made by the petitioner on 6-2- 2025 and received the respondent No.4 against the Board of Directors of the Bhrat Bible college society forthwith pending disposal of the writ petition. Cqunsel for the Petitioner : SRI P.PADMA RAO Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR HOME The Court at the stage of admission made the following ORDER .a- THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR W.P.No.10087 of 2025 ORDER: The grievance of the petitioner in the present Writ Petition is that the respondents-authorities, basing on the complaint made by the petitioner, are not initiating action to register FIR against the Board of Directors of the Bharat Bible College Society Dabilpur, Medchal, Medchal Malkajgiri, which action oF the respondents it is contended as highly illegal and arbitrary.

2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government ! I Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents, and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at admission stage.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents submit that the issue involved in the present Writ Petition is squarely covered by a decision of this Court in WP.No.7159 of 2025 & batch, dt.10.03.2025, whereby this Court held that both Cr.P.C. and BNSS being complete Code in itself, the petitioners therein are required to work out their remedies thereunder, and for the said reason a writ petition is not maintainable, and the said common order would apply in all force to the Facts of the present case. 2

4. Having regard to the above submission, for reasons alike as were stated in the aforesaid Writ Petitions, videW.p.Nos.7159 of 2025 & batch, dt.10.03.2025, and in terms thereof, this Writ petition is also disposed of. No order as to costs.

5. Registry is directed to append a copy of the order passed in W.P.Nos.7159 of 2025 & batch, dt.10.03.2025, to this order.

6. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. N //TRUE COPY// SD/-A. SRINIVASA REDDY SISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER ,S c ariat Buildings, State of mmissionerate t\,4edchal The Principal Secretary, Department of Home Telangana at Hyderabad. The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda Co tt/alkajgiri at Malkajgiri. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda Commissionerate I\/edchal I\4alkajgiri at Malkajgiri. The station House Offlcer, Medchal Police station Medchal-Malkajgiri District Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUTI One CC to SRI P.PADMA RAO, Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies tt- SA LS (Along with a order passed in W.P. No. 7154 of 2025 and batch, dt: 10 03.2025) I To J 4 6 6 7 11 l HIGH COURT DATE D :04/0412025 r) ORDER WP.No.10087 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P AT THE STAGE OF ADMISSION WITHOUT COSTS, 4lt\ ( * riE Sl4 16- 1 2 6 Al,f 2[z5? ,/ -t; t' ;-)' THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR W.P.Nos.7139 7154 and 73OS of 2025 COMMON ORDER Since the grievance of the petitioners in all these wnt petitions is one and the same, they are being disposed of by this corrunon order.

2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the Iearned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the offrcial respondent Nos.l & 2, learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing for respondent No.3, and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, these writ petitions are taken up for hearing and disposal at admission stage.

3. Having regard to lis involved and the manner of disposal, this Court is of the view that notice to unoflicial respondents in all these writ petitions is not necessar5r for adjudication of the present Writ Petitions.

4. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioners, in brief, is that they are the owners of various extents of land; and that the oflicial respondent Nos.2 & 3 are trying to dispossess them from their respective lands at tJle behest of unofficial respondents in the writ petitions. 2

5. It is the further case of the petitioners that against the interference being caused by the unofficia.l respondents, they had approached the competent Court of Civil jurisdiction by hling separate civil suits; that rvhile the said suits are pending consideration, the unollicial respondents, with the help of the oflicial respondents, are trying to dispossess them; and that the said action of the respondents-authorities in involving in civil disputes cannot be held as a va-1id action.

6. 1) Per contra, Iearned Government Pleader for Home appearing for 2"d respondent has placed before this Court, written instmctions, dt.10.03.2025, under the signature of the Sub-lnspt:ctor of Police, Tekulapalli Police Station, Bhadradri Kothagudem Districr. By the written instructions, it is stated that the 2nd respondent never interfered with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioners at any point of time nor tried to dispossess the petitioners from their subject lands; and that as per the station records, the 2nd respondent did not receive any complaint against the petitioners nor a;ry criminal case is pending against the petitioners herein.

7. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue appearing on behalf of the 3.d respondent would submit that the petitioners are claiming the subject lalds on the basis of old pattadar pass books, which have since been abolished on issuance of new pattadar pass books, and ttrus, the claim of petitioners being the owners of the subject lands 3 basing on the old pattadar pass books, cannot pima facie be accepted.

8. Learned Government Pleader for Revenue further submits that though the petitioners have made al application.for pass book data correction, the same was made without placing on record the pattadar pass books as issued by the Government of Telangarra.

9. I have taken note ofthe respective subrnissions made

10. Having regard to the submissions made as above, and taking note of the fact that the 2"d respondent, by the written instructions, having categorically stated that the said authority is not interfering with the peaceful possession ar-rd enjo5rment of the petitioners over the subject 1ands, ald since, the 3.d respondent submits that the petitioners are claiming lands on the basis of old/abolished pattadar pass books and also having not frled the new pattada-r pass books issued by the Government of Telangala to establish their right and title over the subject lands, this Court is of the view that in the event of the respondents-authorities initiating any action against the lands being claimed by the petitioners, the authorities are to be directed to follow due process of law and take action strictly in accordalce with law.

11. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. No order as to costs. 4 12 As a sequel miscellaneous petitions pending if any shall stand closed. No order as to costs. T. VINOD KUMAR, J 10tr. March, 2O25 {) 5 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR W.P.Nos. 7139 7L54 and,73OS of 2o25 Dt.1.0.03.2025