High Court · 2025

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 direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent Nos.4 and 5 in harassing the Petitioner by calling the Petitioner to the Respondent Nos.4 Police Station, and thereby the Respondent No.4 and 5 interfering in the personal liberty of the petitioner by pressurizing the petitioner to transfer the Plot of the Petitioner in favour of the Respondent No.S and compromise with the Respondent No.S by paying an amount of Rs.60,00,000/- to the Respondent No.s at the behest of Respondent No.6 as illegal, arbitrary, against to the Principles of Natural Justice and in violation of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of lndia, consequently direct the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 not to harass the Petitioners by calling them to the sth and 6th Respondent Police Station. lA 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 Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 not to harass the Petitioners by calling them to 4th Respondent Police Station pending disposal of the above wrt petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI ANIRUDH SADHU Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 5: GP FOR HOME Counsel forthe Respondent No.6: - The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR Writ Petition No.10574 of 2O25 ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Home appearlng for respondent Nos.l to 5, 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 nature of /rs involved, this Court is of the view that notice to unofficial respondent No.6 is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition.

3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the petitioner, in briet is that the 4th respondent is calling the petitioner to the police station regularly in the name of investigation into Crime No.125 of 2025 dt.27.02.2025 alleged to have been registered against him, in spite of the petitioner regularly appearing before the 5th respondent from 22.03.2025 tlll 07.04.2025, on a daily basis.

4. It is the further case of the petitioner that on being issued with notice under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNSS'), even though the petitioner had submitted explanation on 28.03.2025, the 5th respondent authority without ,'.:*tr;"t- 2 considering the aForesaid explanation had issued further notice on 28.03.2025, <:alling upon the petitioner to appear before the 5th respondent authority on 29.03.2025 at 9.00 AM and thereafter another notice on 29.C3.2025 to appear on 04.04.2025 and on appearing before the 5Lh resporrdent, on the said date, the petitioner was issued with another notice calling upon him to appear again on 07.0'1.2025.

5. Petitioner further contends that even though the petitioner had cooperated wi:h the investigation into the aforesaid crirne by appearing on all the dates as called upon by the authorities, the resp ondents-authorities without conducting investigation into the aforesaid crime, are making the petitioner to,^/ait in the 4th respondent police statior-r from morning till evening and again issuing another notice directing hirn to appear on the following day,

6. It is the further contention of the petitioner that since he has already submitted explanation to the notice issued under Section 35(3) of BNSS, the respondents-authorities, without indicating as to what further investigation is to be undeftaken, are issuing notices crlntinuously, which action of the respondents-authorities it is contended as highly illegal, and arbitrary, thereby, harassing the petitioner, apart frorn interfering with his personal life and liberty. I i

7. Per contra, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 5 would submit that the since the petitioner had submitted his explanation to the notice issued under Section 35(3) of BNSS, the 5h respondent authority may be directed to consider the aforesaid explanation and take further action in the above mentioned crime, viz., Crime No.125 of 2025.

8. I have taken note of the respective contentions urged. .,9. Admittedly, a case has been registered against the petttioner, vide Crime No.125 of 2025 dt.21.02.2025, alleging commission of various offences, wherein the petitioner is shown as accused No.1.

10. The 5h respondent being the Investigating Officer having chosen to issue notice under Section 35(3) of BNSS to the petitioner initially on

21.03.2025 calling upon him to present himself before the 5h respondent on 22.03.2025 at 9.00 AM and on the petitioner appearing before the said authority, the 5h respondent having issued another notice of the said date directing him to appear on the following day, i.e. 23.03.2025, again at

9.00 AM, kept on issuing simllar such notices every day till 29.03.2025, on a daily basis.

11. In the interregnum, the petitioner had submitted his explanation on

28.03.2025, by sending the same under the cover of registered post, 4 which, as evid(lnt from postal tracking report, has been delivered to the 5th respondent authority on 01.04.2025.

12. The petitioner was once again issued with notice dt.29.03'2025 calling upon lim to appear before the 5th responJent authority on

04.04.2025, by which time, the 5th respondent authority had the benefit of the petitioner':; explanation. If only the 5th responden: was not satisfied with the explanation submitted by the petitioner, the s' id authority ought to have speciied as to what further information is required from the petitioner on 114.04.2025, when lre appeared before the said authority' Instead of spr:cifuing as to what further information is required to be furnished by the petitioner in connection with investigation into the above mentior'led crime, the authority had simply issued anrlther notice of the same date, calling upon him to appear again on 07 '04 '2025, which the petitioner clains that he had complied with.

13.ItisnotshowntothisCourtoftherespondents-authoritiescalling upon the petitioner to submit any further informatiort by specifying the same in the notices issued under section 35(3) of BNlis, except directing the petitioner to appear before the 5th respondent authority on the date and the time mentioned therein, claiming that his pre';ence is required in relation to the investigation into Crime No.125 of 2025' 5 L4. This conduct of the 5th respondent authority in issuing notices under Section 35(3) of BNSS without specifying as to the information that is sought to be furnished by the petitioner would indicate that the 5h respondent authority who is the Investigating Officer is not conducting investigation into the said crime but is only directing the appearance of the petitioner before the said authority, which course of action would defeat the purpose and mandate of Section 35(3) of BNSS.

15. If the 5fr respondent authority is not satisfied with the explanation submitted by the petitioner, vide his letter dt.28.03.2025, the authority ought to have mentioned the further information that the petitioner is required to furnish, failing which, the respondents-authorities ought to have taken further action in the matter, based on the information/documents as furnished by the petitioner, which course of action, however, was not followed by the 5th respondent.

16. Since, the petitioner claims to have submitted explanation in connection with the aforesaid crime, registered against him, vide his letter dt.28.03.2025, this Court is of the view that the 5h respondent is to be directed to take further action in the matter by considering the aforesaid explanation submitted by the petitioner, instead of calling him to the police station on daily basis without indicating the further information that is sought to be furnished by the petitioner, in accordance with law. 6 , {1.!i,ffi

17. Subject to above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to cos:s.

18. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/-P. PADMANABHA REDDY \ IDEPUW REGISTRAR \\t' | \ sEcrloN oFFlcER Hyderabad Police Commissionerate' Tower-A' The Principal Secretary, Home Department, T S' Secret;ariat' Hyderabad' Telanoana, State of Telangana. fi ;'DY;;i;t-C;""rai oi-pdtiCe, Police Head Quarters, Lakdi-ka-Pool' Hvderabad, Telangana State - 500004' T# 6;;i.;ii."i "iF"ti.", riEc] io r J r.r, t l-2, B aniara H i lis, Hyd erabad, Telan ga n a State' i],,EEtiii* r-ri,use'Officbr, Lubtei; fiitts potice Station, Fyderabad Police Commissionerate. Hyderabad, Telangana State' iX"'i;;;;t's;ii"s officer, iuotbe HittJPolice station' Hvderabad Police Co mmissioier, rt"e, Hyderabad, Telangana Stale- -. . ^. ONE CC tO SRI ANIRUDH SADHU, AdVOCAIE IOPUU,I iJ" dd.'i" cp ion nbvtE' High court for th-e state o'Telangana' at Hyderabad. [OUT] Two CD Copies To 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B PSK, BS HIGH COURT DATED:0910412025 ORDER WP.No.10574 of 2025 \, a() ( t f,;F l trL u 14/ lt tpn M z t' (T\r o T DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \o V