Kayethi Balaraju v. 1. The State of Telangana

Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India 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 7th respondent in issuing the lmpugned Order No.B/59712025 dated- 21-07-2025 as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and violative of principles of natural justice and Art.19(1)(a) of Constitution of lndia and consequently set aside the same in the interests of justice. |.A.NO:1 OF 2O2!; Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the cir:umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to suspend the lmpr.rgned Order No.8/59712025 dated- 21-07-2025 issued by the 7th respondent pending disposal of the writ petition in the interests of justice. Counsel for the F'etitioner : SRI T.V.RAMANA RAO Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1, 3, 5 & 7 : GP FOR REVENUE Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2, 4 & 6 : GP FOR HOME The Court made the following ORDER I I I I / HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.21899 ot2025 ORDER: Heard Sri T.V. Ramana Rao, leamed counsel for the petitioner, leamed Assistant Govemment Pleader for Revenue and leamed Assistant Govemment Pleader for Home, appearing for respondents respectively.

2. 'Ihis Writ Petition is filed challenging the order dated 21.07.2025 passed by respondent No.7 under Section 163 of the Blraratiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhit4 2023 (for short "BNSS"). ltcspondent No.7 has issued the aforesaid order in exercise of powers under Section 163 of the BNSS prohibiting the petitioner from making. publishing or disseminating any public statement, vidco, mcssage, or writtcn communication, whether in print, digital, or oral lorm that is defamatory, derogatory or provocative in nature against anv public servant including respondent No.7, or that may incite unrest or disturb public peace, until further orders. It is also further stated that such order comes into force with immediate effect and remain valid fbr a period of (30) days unless withdrawn or modified 2 earlier. Violation of the said order shall attract penrrl consequences under applioablc provisions ofthe BNSS and other rekvant laws.

3. Challenging the said ordeq the petitioner filed the present writ petition contending that respondent No.7 did not follow the procedure laid down under Section 163 of the BNSS while passing the impugned order.

4. In the light ol the said submission. it is rclervant to extract Section I 63 ofthe BNSS. which reads as under: "SECTION 163: POWER TO ISSUE ORDER IN T]RGENT CASES OF NUTSANCE OR APPREHENDED DANGER: ( I ) In cases r.vhcre, in the opinion ol a District Magistrate. a Sub-divisional Magistrate or any othcr Executive Magistrate spccially empowered by thc State Government in this behalf, theri is suffrcient ground for proceeding under this section and immediate prevention or speedy rernedl is desirable, such Magistrate may, by a written order st{ting thc material lacts of the ca-se and served in the manncr provided b1' section 153. direct any person to abstain from a certain act or to take cemain order r.vith respcct to certain property in his possession or under his managcment. if srrch Magistratc considcrs that such direction is tike lv to prevent, or tends to prevent, obstruction, annoyance or injury to any person lawfully employed, or danger to human life, health or safety or a disturbance of the public tranquility, or a riot, or an affray. (2) An order under this section may, in cases of emergency or in cases where the circumstances do not admit of the serving in due time of a notice upon the person against whom the order is directed, be passed ex parte. (3) An order under this section may be directed to a particular individual, or to persons residing in a particular place or area, or to the public generally whcn tiequenting or visiting a particular place or area_ (4) No order under this section shall remain in lorce lor morc than two months from the making thereot: Provided that if the State Govemment considers it necessary so to do for preventing danger to human lilb, health or safety or for preventing a riot or any affray, it may, by notiljcation. direct that an order made by a Magistrate under this section shall remain in force for such further period not exceeding six months lrom the date on rvhlch the order made by the I Magistrate would have, but for such order, expired, as it may specifu in the said notification. (5) Any Magistrate may, either on his own motion or on the application of any person aggdeved. rescind or alter any order made under this sct;tion by himself or any Magistrate to him or by his predecessor-in-office. (6) The State Govemment may. either on its own motion or on the application ol any person aggrieved, rescind or alter any order madc b1, it under the proviso to sub-section (4). (7) Where an application under sub-section (-5) or sub-section (6) is received, the Magistrate. or rhe State Govemment, as the case may bc, shall af trrrd to the applicant an early opportunity of appearng before him or it, either in person or by pleader and showing cause against the orderl and if' the Magistrate or the State Govcmment, as the cisc may be, rejects the application wholly or in part. he or it shall record in rwiting the reasons for so doing."

5. Therefore, respondent No.7 being Executivc Nlagistrate has power to pass order in terms of Section 163 of the IINSS, but there should be suflicient ground for proceeding under thc said section and i-rrlaiit" prevention or speed-\ remcdy is desirable. hc may. by a t I I I \ 5 written order stating the material facts of the case and served in the manner provided by section 163, direct any person to abstain from a certain act or to take certain order with respect to certain property in his possession or under his management. If respondent No.7 considers that such direction is likely to prevent, or tends to prevent, obstruction, annoyance or injury to any person lawfully employed, or danger to human life, health or safety or a disturbance of the public tranquility, or a riot, or an affray. Thus, the said ingredients are lacking in the \ impugned order of respondent No.7. He has not mentioned about nulsance or apprchended danger in the impugned order dated

21.07.2025. Therefore, the impugned order is not only in violation of procedure laid down under Section 163 of the BNSS, but also lacks the ingredients of such provision.

6. Therefore, the impugned order dated 21.07.2025 passed by respondent No.7 is set aside. However, liberty 1S granted to respondent Nos.3, 5 and 7 to initiate action afresh in accordance with the procedure laid dorvn under Section 163 of the BNSS. While initiating fiesh action, respondent Nos.3, 5 and 7 shall consider the contention of the petitioner that Section 163 of the BNSS is not 6 applicable to take action against the petitioner herein. Any deviation of this order will be viewed seriously.

7. I'his Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if zLny, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SRINIVASA REDDY STANT REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER I

1. The Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Se etbriat, State of Telangana at Hyderabad

2. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secreta t, State of Telangana at Hyderabad.

3. The Collector, District Magistrate, Rajanna Siricilla District at Siricilla.The Superintendent of Police, Rajanna Siricilla District at Siricilla,

4. The Revenue Divisional Of{icer, Rajanna Siricilla District at Siricilla. 5. The Station House fficer, Siricilla Dist- Rajanna Siricilla at Siricilla. 6. The Tahsildar, and Executive Magistrate, Siricilla Mandal Rajanna Siricilla

7. Two CCs to GP FOR REVENUE, High Court for the State, of Telangana at District. Hyderabad. [OUT]

8. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

9. One CC to SRI T.V.RAMANA RAO, Advocate IOPUC] 10.Two CD Copies To SA LS HIGH COURT DATED:28rc712025 .a . 3 i: .'.i 2 7 tlill 2q5 o r,.t r 1;rr ,/ ORDER WP.No.21899 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE W.P WITHOUT COSTS. ,/2 4t /o// , f