High Court · 2025

Petitiqn undgr A(icle 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstanQes 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 Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respgndents in not considering the Appeal Dated 19 04 2025 for releasing the hotel in the name and style sVR Grand situated at Turkayamjal Village' Abdullapurmet ft/andal' Ranga Reddy District from seizure made by the 4th respondent vide proqqedings Lr No' tjlI I t f .t t t r ; EiIt tai. :, I & i; k I' ... :l L Ft1,..: b 8,1357 12025 Dated ' i).03.2O25 without following due proce ss of laws, which is being illegal, arbitrary and violate of principles of natural justi:e. C<tnsequently set- a-side the proceedings passed by the 4th respondent. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 QPC praying that in the circums rances stated in the affidavit filed in gupport of !he petition, !he High Court may be p,leased fo direct the 2nd responderlt 'o consider the Appeal Dated 19.04.202 i filed against the 4th respondsnt proceqdings vide Lf Ns. Bl357l?925 Qated 13 C3 2025 for release of the hotel in the nam? and stylq SVR Qrand l;lqtel gituatgd a Turkayamjal Village, Abdullapurrnet lrlanc al, Ranga Re4Ey Districf from seizure withottt following due process of law, pending dispoEal of the abqvq yvrit petition. Counsel for the Petitioners: SBI PBAVEEN ryUMAR VEERJALA Counsel fof the R_espondent Sos.1 tp 4: M9. TEKURU SWETqHA, AGP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent No.S: FP FOR HPME The Coqrt m4de the following; ORPER (" I T I I f a' ? i t 1t I i i! $

1. :: I <. : r : HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY VIRIT PETITIoN No. 13598 of 2o25 ORDER: This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is hled seeking following reliel '...to issue on appropriate utit order or direction more particularlg one in the nature Writ of Maniamug decloring the action of the respondents in not consideing the Appeal Dated 19.O4.2025 for releasing the hoteL in the name and stVle SW Grand. situated at Turkagamjal Vitlage, Abdullopurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddg District, from sei'zure made bg tle 4th respondent uide proceedings Lr.No B/357/2O25 Dated 13.o3.2o25 utithout fo ouing due process of laws, which is betng iltegal, arbitrary and. uiolate of pinciples of natural justice ConseqtentlA set aside the proceedings pa-ssed bg the 4th respondent. '

2. The case of the petitioners is that they are lessees of the hotei namely 'SVR Grand (OYO)' situated at Turkayamjal Village, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, having obtained the same under a registered lease deed dated 18.09.2024. Il is stated that a case in Crime No.30 of 2025 d,aled 16.01.2025 was registered on the file of Adibatla Police Station for the offences under Section 65(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023, and Section 3(a) read with Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2Ol2 (for short, "POCSO Act") against one G. Anjaneyulu. The grievance of the petitioners is that even though they have no connection whatsoever with the said crime, the 4ft respondent, with the assista,a(6 of police personnel, has seized the hotel premises and I i I l l 2 kept it under lock and key. The seizure was intimtLted t c the 3rd respondent thr,rugh proceedings in Lr.No.Bl35'7 12O25 dated 13.03.2025. It rr stated that aggrieved by the said a( tion, the petitioners subroitted an appeal before the 2"'i 'espolident on tg .O4 .2025, seel<.ng release of the hotel but till date no a ction has been taken. The learnec counsel for the petitioners has submitterl that the 3. seizure o[ the rotel premises by the 4h respond :nt il; without jurisdiction. as there is no provision under th: PO CSO Act empowering the llxecutive Magistrate to seize private prop'erty' It is further slrbmittecl that the petitioners were neither is sued any prior notice nor afforded an opportunity of hearing befrrre sr:izing the subject hoteI itncl therefore, the said action orr the part of respondents is vLolation of the principles of natural jur;tice'

4. On the ottrer hand, Ms. Tekuru Swetcha, 1ez rned Assistant GovernmenL Ple,rder for Revenue appearing for respc nden - Nos.1 to 4, submitted thz.l the alleged offence occurred within the p'emises of the subject ho,t:l and the 4ft respondent, being the Executive Magistrate, exer:ised his powers and seize the prenLises and accordingly, vidr: letter dated 13.03.2025 intimated the same to the 3'd respondent. \ t I l 3

5. On consideration of the submissions arrd perusal of the material placed on record, this Court is of the view that the grievance ofthepetitionersrelatestoseizureofimmovablepropertyin connection with a criminal case in Crime No'30 of 2025' which is under investigation. It is brought to the notice of this Court that one Subham Kumar, hotel manager of hotel was arrayed as Accused No'2 in the said crime and the remand report of accused No' 1-G' Anjaneyulu is submitted before the learned XV Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ibrahimpatnam, Ranga Reddy District' [n view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the 6. petitioners have an efficacious and alternative remedy of approaching the competent criminal court for seeking re lease of the seized property. Accordingly, the respondent No'3 is directed to handover the subject hotel premises to the jurisdictional Court i'e'' the learned XV Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ibrahimpalnam' Ranga Reddy District,whichisseizedofthematterrelatingtoCrimeNo'30of 2025. Thereatter, the petitioners are at liberty to approach the said Court by hling an appropriate application under the provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Sural<sha Sdnhita, 2023 (BNSS) seeking release of the hotel premises. ln the event of such an application being hled' the learned Magistrate shall examine and dispose of tfe 1am1 "1'::'' t * 4 I in accordance with law, after verifying the documer ts rel ating to the subject proper -\/ and affording opportunity to al1 parties c,)ncerned. 7 . With the above observations, this Writ Petitic n is r lisposed of No order €rs to losts. As a seqrrel, the miscellaneous petitions pend ng, if any, shall stand closecl //TRUE COPY// SD/-A. SRINIVASA REDDY DEPI.jTY REGISTRAR )t/ SE3TION bFFICER

1. The Principal llecretary, Revenue Department, Dr.B,R Ambr:dkar Secretariat Buildings, Tank Bund, The State ofTelangana, Hyderabad. 2. The District Crollector, Ranga Reddy, Ranga Reddy Dis trict 3. The Revenue.Divisional Officer, lbrahimpatnam Divisicn, Rarrga Reddy District. Comm iss ione rrate.

4. The Tahasild ar, Abdullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy Distric t. 5 The Station Flouse Officer, Police Station Adibatla, ftar:hakorda, Rachakonda 6. One CC to Sr Praveen Kumar Veerjala, Advocate [O 7. Two CCs to 3P for Revenue, High Court for the $tate of Telrngana, at 8. Two CC to The GP for Home, High Court for the State cf Telirngana, at Hyderabad [OUT] ,UC] HyderabadIOLIT] 9. Two CD Copies *r,r- 4!-.-- To, I TJ BS Li H F i .''€11:'l.r&:;,'rt". '6.11 7' 1' HIGH COURT CC TODAY DATED:3010412025 /" .$ ? r\, I ORDER WP.No.13598 ofe0 li,.qi ..1' \ 25 ,-r.a -+j._- , DISPOSING IDF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS p {