High Court · 2025

Petition Under Articre 226 0f the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue a writ order or direction writ, order or direction more in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents more particularly that of the action of respondents more particurarry that of respondents 2 to 4 in not following the procedure contemplated under section 35 (3) BNSS and section 41A of the old code, followed by the Judgment of flenep261g Supreme Court in case of I. ::l Arnesh Kumar AlFl :i:C l4 SUPREME COURT 2756 pensivel'" snga'3 ng to arrest the petitioners wt'lr': :e rving an inconsistent and inappror'ria1e n ltice Under Section 90 of Cr. ,' a t'''"0 1205 2025in relation to a false ccmprlirint vide FIR No 42612024 on the 'lle of 4th respondent made by 5th res pon ient for the offences under s€ r:tic I -: 379 420' R/w 120 - B of IPC' app'r:aring t; coerce the petitioner for sett rr 3 :' vate scores with $t{4 respondent (husbanrJ of Petitioner No 1) though the offr' rri)es are of no penal consequence tlan 7 -Ye ars and less thanTyearsasbenl;r"g-'t"tit"'y'unconstitutional'aparlfromb:ingviolative ofArticleslg'2larrrJl0OAoftheConstitution'principlesol'NaturaJustice'Fair :'setaside not to trr()st t re Notices dt Play and equalnt:s'l; t" 12-5- 2o25of 4tt -?'erslondent issued under section 90 of CjllP(l in slirns t{o.426 of 2024 , on the fitr: o f lih respondent 'O "*'"Ou"ntially t.A.NO :1 OF 202 r5 )n 151 CPC praying that in the c i'curnsre nces stated in the affidavit file' j rn ';rrpport o/ the petition' the High Cor.t't ntay le pleased to direct responden.s : to 4 not to indurge in any coerci\'o sleps like arrest or securing the pre r:;r:r .; : of petitioners and scrupulously follc'w tl- e pr ocedure under section 35 (3) BNrss znd section 41A of the old code' in terms of tt e Judgment of Honorable Suprcm') Court in case of Arnesh Kumar r:ported as AIR 2014 SUPREME: Cotlf:i- ',756 n pursuant to notice under secticn I ) of Cr' P C ' dated 12.05.20rr. rr -,:ration to a farse compraint vide FrR r'lo,126l 1024 on the file of 4th respondorrl 'r ade by 5th respondent for the offenc't:s tlnde r sections 379' 420, Rlw t2O - E\ 't1 l-C 12025 pending the disposal of the '"vrit peli ion l.A. NO:2 OF 20 ?.1 Between: Ramakrishna Patel !i,o Jasmat Patel, Rto B-2-293182IDNK/'12 A Blo ;k' Lakshmi ^. varyvita Roa(, ',rc o o"r"'iionl'i rVrirr, Sfr"if,pet, Jubilere Hr/ls llydefabad 033 ...PETITIONER/RESt,ONDENT No.5 ' AND 1 2 3 Mrs. Vaishnavi patel. Wo,Ramakrishna patel, D/o Sri Darshan Baldev tshai paret Aged abour zg vears, riio i1lA, il;iy;;;r.patet Sociery, Near A ro m a s c h oo I U s m a n p u ra, A nmu; b a ; C;jrrii Hddij. Sri Darshan Baldev Bhai p9!e.1, Slo Baldevbhai patet, Aged about 62 years. occ. Business. Rto, 1,ttA,-ianvrp,i,jiji!' iJ"i"ty Near Aroma uchoot Usman pura, Ahmedabao Cuiiais6doi'3:'", Smt Neelamben Darshan Blgl.prluf,. \r',//o Darshan Baldev Bhai patel Aged about SB years. nlo 1uR-Daiiyrp;rEi;i'.;crety, Near Aroma ."

4. The State of Tel o"pa.imen-t,6;:TsRffiiJ:3[:""#erdli:".::t,#:iir#ydi]o,. ,...RESPONDENTS/PET|T|ONERS Nos.1 to 3

5. The Deputy Commissionerof .police, West Zone, Hyderabad. 6. The Assistant Commissioner of police, West Zone, Hyderabad. 7. The lnspector of potic6, Jubitee Hiils pS, Hyderabad City. .....OFFICIAL RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENT Petition Under section 'r 5i cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to vacate the interim stay order dated 2,tosl2o2s passed in w.p.No.15302 of 2025 , :, !}.! .,-t -:r. :.:,: rn ;._ : . _.. Counsel for the petitioners : SRI IMMANENI RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.S : SRt p.SURyANARAYANA The Court made the foilowing ORDER MURTHY 7 THE H.)N,BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR Writ Pet tio No. 1 0 of 20 ORDER: Hearo e,trT.. (t counsel lor the petilioners, lcarn )d (lo\e-rlment Pleader for iif, r: appearing ior respondent Nos [o 1 and Sri P.Suryana a .: i Flurthy, lt:arnt''cl ctilrnsel appearing for re;1 ondent No.5 and Per Lsrr o ' l: recoTd'

2. The ca i( i tnc petitioners, in brief' is that' therc lre rnat-imonial disputes belr.re,'n 1f e l't petitioqer and the 5th responde't hereir ' which resulted in th: :i: tlspondent lodging a private complainr' before' he XVil Additional (- ri.'1 " etropolitan Magistrate' Hyderabad' anrJ : t being -lad reg stered a referred iO t-€t tc t) ldent-a uthorities, the 4ti' respondent case, vl':,le C' rr r ir. 'i16 oi 7Q)q dt )u J': '2024 ' agaitst I l] p'r"rll(ners' it is t(r'.-r'. .-aj. oi ihe pctrLtr"'rrr'rs rhat thuugn il rl'+ r:r pondent 3. had re gistcrtrr-l tf aforcsaid crime whcrcin the pcrtitione rs a 'e ill rayed as accusecl 1 r,) l, lrc respondents-a uthorities instead o{ iss(llnq a notice under Sectiori )!.-) o{ BNSS, have issued notice under ::;ection 90 Cr'P C' = 94 of BNSII r^," i-h notice can only be issued to a witr'')ss and rot to an accused, ar'r. l:i ),lalr, thc irlpuqneo notlce directing tlc ;pp': lrance of thc petitioil. t ; rl i lnrte ctiotl r'^;iln Li rc abcvc: crime i., trrta l' without jurisdictiotr i) ,1 . - | s, ser:ks for quashlrrg r'rf the said noti' t:' ?

4. Per contra, learned Governrrent pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.I to 4 would submit that, since, the dispute between the 1st petitioner and the 5rh respondent is oniy a matrimonial dispute, the respondents-authorrties though having registered a crime on being referrcd by th6 yy11 Adcit.j6631 (_hicf Metropo,!lan Magistrate, Hyderabad, did not immediatcty treat the petitioncrs as notice under Se*ion 35(3) of BNSS,;r*;; jr,#T: guidelines laid down by the Apex Court in Lalita Kumari v/s, Covernment of I!.p.1.

5. Learned Government pleader further- submits that in order to secure the presence of the petitioners in the crime registcred based on a private complaint lorJqrtd by the 5rh resPondent, the authorities havc issued notice onry under section g0 Cr.p.C.= 94 BNSS and for the said reason, the notice cannot be considered as invalid notice for the petitioners to feel aggrieved by it.

6. Learned Government pleader futher submits that keeping in mind the guidelines laid down by the supreme cout in Latita Kumarrs case (supra), the said procedure is adopted and if the petitioners are aggrieved by the issuancc Of such no[rcc, lhc .]Ulhot-ities havc rro objcction For this '1zor:1 ra scn zt: / \ court setting 2,,,d1 , .ne same, and leaving it open to tiro r.sp. rdents- authoritics tc; 1o or ' lul process of law' Learnc(l ..or' l ']ili appcaring on utlnalf of lhe 5'' res[]ond'lnt/ lc facto 7. complainant su t-t''t that if this Court wure to set aside t-re roli:r: issued (3) of BNSS' tht: respondents-a uth lrrt es nay be undcr Sectior I directed to fcll ;rr' lJe process of law while investigating rntc tl-e subject crime register r:l'l In vierr :lf :.'c aforesaid submissions' and since' tl'r: ptltitro -rers feel B. aggrreved Dy t,,:' . rrci: o1 notice 'inccr SecLton 90 Cr'P C'rseclror 94 BNSS tobeisSUeCjI(]il.']l^/llnesseslnstcadolissuingnoticeurl(lerSer1on35(3) of BNSS, wh:' :tri ;rrraycd as accused Nos'1 to 3 in Crim': Nc li( of 2024' dt.20.05.20i'1, i ls Court is of thc vrcw that the impugrrt d notice dt.12.05.20,1: i':Led to the petitioners in the above meltiored crime cannot be l.rt:k: 'o be issued validly and is liable lo le : et aside' Accordingly, h(r 'otce under Section 90 Cr'P C/94 BNI:;S' dt Ll'05 2025 is set asidr: Fl \ {lycr, it is open for th(l rcspo nderlt : -a Lrtn('r tles' who having reqi;t('r': i lhe aforesaid crinle, to follow due p roccss c !' law and take furthcr ,rr,i . r in accordance with law. O qr rhi,. l aDove direction, lhc iryrit Petiti0n ij dl;pcs tf.l of, NO order als tO I t.i ri;t : ,* 4 Frr-- 10' Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pencjing in this writ stand closed. petition sha/l SD/-A. SI SRINIVAS TANT RE A REDDY GISTRAR IITRUE COPYII To ECTION OFFICER

1. The princi Secretaria The De 2 a pal Secreta t, State of Tela ,Dr.B puty Commis ngana at Hyderabad ry, Home Department sroner of pol tcP, West Zone Hyderabad The As srstant Com mrssioner of Police, West Zo ne Hyderabad The lnspector of police, Jubilee HillsPS,H yderabad City Two C CstoGpF OR HOME High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad louIj One CC to SRI I MMANENI RAMA RAO , Advocate IoPUC One CC to SRI P SURYAN ARAYANA MURTHY , Advoca te (OPUC) Two CD Coptes ff(mbedkar Tetangana 4 5. b 7 B SA BS W HIGH COURT DATED:25r06/?"025 C) i. * HE SI4 -....- ,4'i'' rl' I (i ( 1 r I JUL 20[ '.\ i. - .:- ". - .-:-- .7', I \-, - ORDER WP.No.1530? of 2025 \ DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOU'f C:r)STS. 1' I