Constitution Bench of Supreme Court of lndia in the case of Lalitha Kumari vs State of U,P and Others and consequently quash the against the

' 5l"raAr,f#"r.,??ig:n Rep 2. The Superintendent of police, Bhadri Kothagudem Distrrct 3. Shri Gaddam praveen Kumar, S/o not known to eragnana Secretarjat Saifabad. Hyderabad ^by its prin6ip6r y,,qlrry Horne Deparrmenr, - - -p-,,,, 'ul Sub lnspector of po District,,urrce, chunchuparri porice-s?itr,:;:"dr:no?l^y,?li,r3:i 4 Therstation House Officer, Chunchupalli police Station, Bhadri Kothagudem 5. Qmt ponampeili Srui; nyo +- r : i I i, h"a,;;t3fc Hf. ft H n tffi i €:;,,,1"?,1, II?"g,8 rorn e m a k e r ..,RESPONDENTS 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 writ of certiorari caring for the records of Generar Diary/station is the record of a, information received ;;;il ::^:.:lr^?,rrl complaint' Non-following by investigating officer about guidelines framed by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Lalita Kumaii ,r. o"* ,o *r,nr, registration of First lnformation Report is mandatory under section 154 of the Code of Criminal procedure ancj where the preliminary enquiry is to be conducted Matrimoniar disputes/ famiry disputes about the proceedings against ffi;:r, ", the Petitioner /Accused No 6 in Crime No.94 ol 2023 sections under 498-A, 294- 8,506 of lPC, Sec.3,4 of DPA on the file of P.S. Chunchupalli, Bhadradri Kothagudem District is illegal, arbitrary and agalnst the guidelines framed by the Constitution Bench of Supreme Court of lndia in the case of Lalitha Kumari Vs. State of U,P and Others and consequently quash the against the petitio ner/accu sed No.6 in Crime No.94 of 2023 sections under 498-A, 294-8, 506 of lPC, Sec.3,4 of DPA on the file of P.S. Chunchupalli, Bhadradri Kothagudem District in the interest of justice. lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 stay of all further proceedings including appearance of the Petitioner /Accused No. 6 in Crime No.94 of 2023 sections under 498-A, 294-8, 506 of lPC, Sec.3,4 of DPA on the file of P S Chunchupalli, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, pending disposal of the main writ petition jn the interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VEERA BABU GANDU Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 4: SRI ANIKETH REDDY, AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.5: Mrs. GREESHMA, REP. FOR SRI M.PRATHEEK REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI WSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.25369 OF 2023 ORDER: The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner/ accused No.6 for the follou'ing rclief : "...to issue r,,'rit of Certioral ca1lir-rg lor the records of Gener:rl Dian/Station Diarr'/Dai1v Diarv is thc record of all ir.rformation rccci"cd in a police station itl)out cr:rlplarir.rt non folkrwing l)v rnvcstrg:rlrrrg olfir'r'r about guidehnes framed by the Constitution Bcnch ol the Suprcme Court in Lalita Kumari Vs. Go'r,t. of UP on that 4egstration of First Information Report is mandzrtorv u:rdcr Section 154 of rhr: Clodc of Criminal Procedure and rvhere the preliminary enqurn is to be conducted Matrimonial disputes/ famrly disputes about the proceedLngs agarnst the Petitioner /Accused .r"o.6 in Crime No.94 ol 2023 Sections under 498A, 2948, 506 of IPC Sec.3, 4 of DPA on the lllc of P.S. Chunchupalli, Bhadradri Kothagudem Dlstrict is illega.l, a;bitrary and . the..guidelines.fran.Ied.. by. the Constrtutron Bench of Supreme a€ainst Court of India in the case of La.litha Kumari Vs. State of U.P. and Others ald consequeirtly quash the proceedings against t.Ile petitioner/ accused No.6 in Crime No.94 of 2023 sections under 498A, 2948, 506 of IPC Sec.3, 4. of DPA on the . file :of P.S., Chunchupa'lli, Bhadradri Kothagudem District in the interest ofjustice.."

2. Heard Sri Veerababu Gandu, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Aniketh Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, representing the learned Governmenl Pleader for Home and Mrs.Greeshma, learned counsel representing Sri M.Pratheek Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.5.

3. Learned counscl ior the 1;etitioner sr-li:mits that :r false case has bcen registered against the petitioncr- br thc dc facto complainant and that though he has no involvcr''nt:nL il.r thc family affairs ol the de-lacto complainant. her.husb:rnrl :rnd othcr .\ \ Page 2 of3 family members, his name was falsely added in the impugned FIR registered for the offenceS under Sections 49a-A.294-8 and 506 IPC arnd Scctions 3 :rnci 4 ol the DP Act. 1'he police. v"'ithout condlrc'ting preiiminirn l:rrd proper enquin', have I egistered the i.'lR. llt lurthcr slrilmrttcd thirt hc is a doctor b1 profession. 'l'hough his nirrnc lriIS b( cr'l clclctcd in the ch:rrqe sheet, the accusaLions agalnst him in the impugned FIR are causing damage to his repLrtatiorr. 'l'herefore, hc seeks to quash tht proceedings against the petitioner in FIR No.94 of 2023 on the file of PS, Chunchupalli, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader representing respondent Nos.l to 4 while furnishing a copy- of charge-sheet, filed before the learned II Additional. Judicial First Class Magistrate in Crime No.94 of 2023, would submil that as per the statemcnts o[ LWs.4 trr 7, the ro]e of accused Nos.3 to 6 is not established and hence, LW 10/the investigating offlcer obtaincd trccrrsecl deletion permission from thc SDPO, Kolhagr-rclr:m r,ide CNo.02/DEL/SDPO-KGM/2024, dated I 2.03,.20-2-l . I Ic further submit[eci that sincc thc r-rame of the petitionelrLccLlsed No.6 is not r-rddcd in t[re chargc-sheet in view ol nor-r-est:rblishment of his rolc in the alleged crime, nci damage u,oulcl cause to his reputation and the cause in the present q,rit I'.r:. -1 ,)1 -l pclilion dr,cs :r<,t survivr Tlrirs sratirrq. h. l-r'q',tcslorl lr) (jlsnllss thc present writ pclriion ars iniructuous

5. Uprtn perusal of charge-sheet lt is noliced that thc name of the petitioner has been deleted from the arrav of thc accused in the charge-sheet and in that view of the matter this Court is of the opinion that the cause in the present writ petition iloes. not survive and hence, the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed as infructuous.

6. In the result, the present writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order as to the costs

7. As :r sequel, misctlilaneous petlLions. il'an-u'. ccnd jrls sh rr ll stand disrnissed To, //TRUE COPY// Sd/. P, PADMANABHA REDDY EPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER 1 2 3 One CC to SRI VEERA BABU GANDU, Advocate Io UC] One CC to SRI M.PRATHEEK REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] 4 Two CD Copies BS MP o- HIGH COURT DATED:0510312025 ORDER WP.No.25369 of 2023 ( v \i iiE S'rr. 14: 1 3 tl APR 2025 \ c) -I' ,r/f, -\_ r)r:;;,r. r i, a.::: D!SMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS, WITHOUT COSTS e)\J p\