Dr. Dilnaaz Farooqui v. 1. The State of Telangana

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 and writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus under Nlicle 226 of Constitution of lndia declaring the action of the Respondent No.3 in not executing the Non bailable Warrant pending against the Respondent No.S and consequently direct the respondent No.3 to seize the original passport of the Respondent No.S so as to ensure the presence of the Respondent No.5 before the trial court. 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 No.3 herein to immediately apprehend the Respondent No.5 for executing the pending NBW against her and restrain the Respondent No.S from leaving the jurisdiction of Hyderabad without seeking prior permission of the trial court pending disposal of this writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI B.KEERTHI REDDy Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 TO 3: Gp FOR HOME counsel forthe Respondent No.4: sRr p.suRAJ yADAv, srl FoR CENTRAL Counsel for the Respondent No.5: -- GOVT. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WRIT PETITION No .L7193 0F 2025 ORDER Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner' learned Government Pleader for Home appearlng on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 , Sri P Suraj Yadav' leanred Counsel appearing for respondent No 4 and with the consent of learned Counsel appearing for Lhe parties' the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the stage of admission' 2. Having regard to the nature of lis involved and the manner of disposal of the Writ Petition' this Court is of the view that notice to unofficial respondent Nos'7 and 8 is not necessary for adjudication of the present Writ Petition'

3. The case of thc petitioner, in brief is that though Non- bailable Warrants (NBws) are pending against the unofhcial respondent. herein, the 3'd respondent is not taking any steps for executing the NBWs which action of the respondents it is contended as highly illegal, arbitrary and also in dereliction of dutieswithaconsequentialdirectiontothe3.drespondentto seize the original passport of the 5h respondent so as to ensure the presence o[ thc 5rh respondent before the trial Court in 1 I I Z connection with C.C. No.3969 of 2022 pending on the hle of XIII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Hyderabad'

4. Per contra, learned Government Ple adr r for Home appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 wou d srrLrmit that NBWs which were pending against the 5m respo ldent were in fact executed and the 5h respondent thereafter filed Crl'M'P' No.6017 of 2024 in C.C. No.3969 of 2022 and -hc concerned Magistrate by order dated 27.01.2025 had recalled the NBWs pending against the 5h respondent by imposing ccnditions'

5. Learned Government Pleader further subrr ils that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the 56 respondent failing to comply with the conditions imposed by the concerned Magistrate at the time of granting bai1, the petitioner has to approach the concerned Magistrate and cannot maintain the present petition, more particularly seeking relief of not to leavc the jurisdiction of the Court without permission by bringing to thc notice of the Court the alleged violation of bail conditions for rhe Magistrate to take note of the same and issue appropriatc orc crs.

6. 7 . I have taken note ofthe respective contentions urged Though the petitioner by the present Writ Petition had claimed of the 3'd respondent not executing the tlBWs pending I I -) agalnst the 5h respondent, it is a matter of record that the NBWs pendi,g against the Sth respondent have been recared by the Magistrate by her order dated 2Z.Ol.2O2S by imposing certarn conditions. Though the pedtioner before this court had urged that the 5rh respondent by viorating the bair conditions is seeking to lcave the jurisdiction of the Court, it is to be noted that if the said claim of the petitioner is to be accepted as correct, the petitioner is required to approach the concerned Magistrate which had passed the aforesaid order granting bail to the 5th respor-rdenI while recalling the NBWs, for the Court to take further action.

8. Since, it is not shown to this Court of the petitioner approaching thc concerned Magistrate bringing to the notice of the 5h respondent seeking to leave the jurisdiction of the Court by violating the conditions imposed in the order dated 27 .O1 .2025, this Courr is of the view that the petitioner shoujd be relegaLed to avail the remedies provided under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) and for the said reason cannot maintain the petition.

9. Accordingll,, granting liberty as noted above, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 4 Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition, shall stand closed ' //TRUE COPY// SD/.MOHD.ISMAtL PUTY REGISTRAR \ SECTION OFFICER The Principal SAcretary, Home Department' Secretarial' Hyderabad' if EHi".Tgfiti?a'"?,[ilfli*slsals;?,,.r*. Et?H h :Ii:f ilT;l Hiffi IJT Eist?'Yll t ulslv s: l?Jr "' Tfl '8 ""'n N "* fu i:g;rsl?b'.Hil1:E3nR:ni'i""..1i"J3luYi,i,,",unnunu,u' sc FoR .ENTRAL Gow loPUCl BI1"6t#t8'r'lr*, Two CD CoPies 'ADAV, To 1 2 3 4

5. 6. 7 8 PSK. LS HIGH COURT DATED:2310612025 ORDER WP.No.17193 of 2025 1 nE SI4 o({ o 01 JUL 2U5 1st oFspATC r-rEo. DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \\ 0