✦ High Court of India · 25 Aug 2025

The High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 25 Aug 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
25 Aug 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,059 words

THE HONOUR.ABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION NO: 9789 OF 2017 Between: Syed Hameed, S/o. Late. Syed lsmail, Age: 40 years, Occ Almaara Mechanic, Rl/o. H. No. 17 -7 -6561 1, Nagabowli, Dabeerpura, Hyderabad, Telangana State. AND

1. The State of Telangana, Rep by its Prl. Secretary, Home Dept, Secretariat, ...PETITIONER Hyderabad.

2. The Commissioner of Telangana State. Police, Hyderabad, Basheerbagh Hyderabad,

3. The DCP, South Zone, At Puranahaveli, Hyderabad. 4. The Asst. Commissioner of Police, Meerchowk Division, at Meerchowk, .Hyderabad.

5. The Station House Officer, Rainbazar Police Station, Hyderabad City and District.

6. Mr. Aaddu, C/o D. Sudarshan H. No. 17-7-25511Nagabowli, Hyderabad. 7. Mr. Khalid, C/o D. Sudarshan H. No. 17-7-255t1Nagabowli, Hyderabad. B. Mr. Riyaz, C/o D. Sudarshan H. No. 17-7-25511Nagabowli, Hyderabad. 9. Rahaman, Clo D. Sudarshan H. No. 17-7-25511 Nagabowli, Hyderabad. Nagabowli, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS 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 lvtandamus, by declaring the action of the respondent.No.2 to 5 in not investigating the cases in Crime.No.13612016, Crime No 18412016, and Crime No.41 12017, of Rain Bazar Police Station, Hyderabad and not providing t 1 : ,i i I ;. protection trl the family members of the petitioner and his property bearing No. 17-7-255, lrJagabowli, chilla, Dabeerpura, Hyderabad from ,hands of the respondent.No.6th to 9th and their associates, by taking necessaiy action against them, as il egal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and violative of ,\rticle 14,19 and 21 of Constitution of lndia. Consequenfly to direct the responcent.No.2 to 5 to hand over the investigating of the in Crime.No.13612016. Crime No. 18412016 and Crime No.41l2017, of Rain Bazar Police Station, Hyderabad to other police officer other then the respondent.No.5th by providing protection to the petitioner and his family members and property bearing No. 17-7-255, Nagabowli, chilla, Dabeerpura, Hyderabad from hands of the respondt;nt.No.6th to gth and their associates, by taking necessary action against them. l.A. NO: 10F 2017 P. NO: 12130 F 20171 Petitiorr under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavt filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent.No.2 to 4 to provide protection to the petitioners and their family membt>rs as well as property bearing No. 17-7-255, Nagabowli, Chilla, Dabeerpura, l{yderabad from the hands of the respondent.No.6th to gth and their associates, forthwith, pending disposal of W.p. counsel for ttre Petitioner: sRl CHALLA sRtNtvASA REDDY (NoT PRESENT) Counsel for ttre Respondents No.1 to 5: Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 to g: -- The Court macle the following: ORDER J I /' I I I I I I I : I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUI(ARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.9 749 oF 20L7 ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of constitution of India seeking the following relief/s:- "...fo issue a turit ord.er or direction more particularlll one in the nature of wnt of Mandamus bu declarinq the action of the respondent Nos.2 to 5 in not inuestiqatinq the cases in cime No.136/2O16, Crime No.184/2O16 and Crtme No.41/2O17 of Rain Bazar Police station, Hud"erabad and not prouidinq protection to the famitu members of the petitioner and his properttt bearinq No.17-7-255, Naqabowli, Chilla, Dabeerpura, Huderabad from hands of the respond.enf /vos. 6 to 9 and their associafes bu t%kinq necessary action aqainst them as illeqal, arbitraru and aqainst the principles of'natural iustice and uiolatiue of Arttcles 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of Ind"ia. Consequentlu to direct the respondent Nos.2 to 5 to hand. ouer the inuesttqating in crime No.136/2016, crime No.184/2016 and crime No.41/2O17 of Rain Bazar Police station, Hud.erabad. to other police officer other then ttle respondent No.S bU prctuidinq protection to the petitioner and his familu members and propertu bearinq No.17-7-255, Naqabowli, chilla, Dabeerpura, Huderabad from hands of the respondent Nos.6 to 9 and their associates bg taking necessary actton against them...."

2. None appears for the Petitioner

3. Heard Mr.R.Laxmikanth Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 5

4. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that the present writ petition was filed seeking a 2 decla.:ation that respondent Nos.2 to 5 failed to conduct proper investigation in crime No. 184 of 2ot6, crime No.136 of 2016, and crime No.41 of 2017 of Rain Bazar police Station, Hyclerabad. It is further submitted that: a) In Crime No.136 of 2016, after investigation, a charge sheet was filed before the VIII Additional Chief I\{etropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad. Upon con.clusion of the trial, the case ended in acquittal on

25.1| .2023. b) Irr crime No. 184 of 2016, lollowing investigation, a final rt:port w'as filed before the VIII Additionat Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, closing th e case: on the ground of "[ack of evid.ence." c) In crime No.4 | of 2oL7, a charge sheet was filed before the vlII Additional chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nermpally, Hyderabad, and the case was numbered as C. C. No.0B of 2Ol7 on 17 .L2.2O23. After trial, this matter too ended in acquittal. .. .ir:.- - '. :Vl'! . J In view of the above, it is contended that the grievance .'/ raised in this writ petition d.oes not survive for consideration and the petition has become infructuous'

5. Having regard to the submissions o[ the learned Assistant Government preader and in light of the judicial outcomes in the underlying criminal proceedings, this Court is of the considered. view that no further adjudication is warranted.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. MiscellaneousPetitions,pendingifzflY,shallstand closed. To -.-.."--",.-.-. SD/.B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (9 SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY/ l.oneCCtoSRlCHALLASR|N|VASAREDDY,AdvocateIoPUC] 2. Two ccs to GP for Home, High court for the state of Telangana at Hyderabad.tOUTl

3. Two CD CoPies MP BS B\l /c HIGH COURT DATED:2510812025 ,i' ,' ii C) (J 1 6 t[B ?02b * ..,1 . .:,.t './ ORDER WP.No.9789 of 2011 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS %

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments