High Court · 2025

...RESPONDENTS Petition under Articre 226 of 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, more particurarry one in rhe nature of writ of Mandamus, by decraririg the action of the Respondents No. 2 to 6 in not taking action on the complaint made by the petitioner in connection with the Cr.No 22812025 on Dt.03.05.2025 and 28.07.2025 and not considering the complaint of petitioner pertaining to enquiring the additionar information given by the petitioner as ilegar, arbitrary, unrawfur and viorative of provisions of BNSS and also violative Articles 14,1g and 21 oI the Constitution of lndia. lA NO: 1 OF 2O2s Petition under Section 15't 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 Respondents No. 2 to 6 to take action as per the petitioneis complaints dated 03.05.2025 and 28.07.2025, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition, and pending disposal of the above writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI CH.VENKAT RAMAN Counsel for the Respondents: SRI M.SRINIVAS, AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER .i!:;*ieweflLr* THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PEIITION No. 237sA of 20.25 ORDER: Aggrieved by the action of the respondent Nos.2 to 6 in not taking action on the complaint made by the petitioner in connection with Crime No.22B/2O25, dated O2.O5.2O25 on 03.05.2025 and 28.07.2025 and not considering the complaint of the petitioner pertaining to enquiring the additional information given by the petitioner and to dispose of the representations made by the petitioner, the present Writ petition is fiied. A consequential prayer is made to direct respondent Nos.2 to 6 to take action to the petitioner,s. complaints dated 03.05.2025 and 28.O7.2025, pending disposal of the Writ Petition. I

2. Sri M. Srinivas, leal-ned Assistarrt Government pleader for Home takes notice for responclent Nos.1 to 6.

3. The facts of the case as stated in brief are that the petitioner is a resident of Godavarikhani and is running a business in the name of SM Online Centre for his livelihood. On O2.O5.2O25, when the petitioner was working at his shop, two persons by name Ragula Rajasekhar and Bonagiri Rajendra Kumar (accused persons) attacked the petitioner indiscriminzrtely with l<nives on his stomach ',T ith four stabs and also attackcd on lris hcad, Iefr clbo',v, right hand ancl on his chest. In ttre said attack, his right l,:g al cl thigh r'vas injured and petiLioner was adtrtitted in Godavarikhani Goverument l{ospital' It is further submitted that Crime No.22B ol 2025 was registered on 02.05.2025 by respondent No.t->, in 'rvhich the said accused were also remandcd. Thereafter, the petilioner fotlnd a video, wherein the the abovc 2 accuseC v.'Iere gathered rvith five other sLlspects b-r' name Bandari Knrnar, Bancl.'l'i Srinivas, Bandari Lakshmi , Swaroopa with their close associate Saddanapu Shiva Kumar. As per the contents, it vras known t,o the petitioner that they have gathcrecl iu one bar atld restaurant, u'herein they planned a conspiracy to 1till the pctitioner. Thereafter, the petitior-rer having con-ring to know tire about said, video, copied the said vicleo in a Inemory card and on 08.O5.2O25, the video was sent to respondent Nos.4 and 6 through Registered Post' But the respondents 4 and 6 haci not taken any action against the said suspects.

4. Aggrieved by the inaction of the respondents, the present Writ Petition is filed.

5. The Assistant Government Pleader for Home placed a copy of instructions issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, .) j l i I l J Godavarikhani, Ramagundam Commissionerate _ respondent No.4 submitting that on o2.o_5.2o25 at 1g:oo hours, the wife of the petitioner Smt.Cheemala Srilatha has given a complaint at PS Godavarikhani - I (T) stating that on O2.OS.2O2S, in between 15:30 hours to 16:OO hours, the accused No.l Sri Ragula Rajashekhar alias Shadow and and accused No.2 Sri Bonagiri Rajendra Kumar tried to kill her husband (the petitioner herein) by attacking with knives with a pre-planned intention to kill him. On receipt of the above complaint, the SI of police, Godavarikhani-I Town pS registered a case in Crime No.22B of 2O25 under Section I O9 read with 3(5) of BNS arld Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ ST (POA) Act, 2015. On 02.05.2025, the Assistanr Commissioner of police _ respondent No.4 conducted investigation against the accused uid.e C.NO_21/GDK/C2- CCRB/RGM/2025, dated 02.OS.2O2S. Therbafter, the Investigating officer examined the petitioner a,d his wife at Government Hospital, Godavarikhani a,d visited the scene of offence, prepared crime deta form, collected Mos and caste certificates. On 03.O5.2025 at I2:OO hours, the Investigating Officer arrested the accused and on interrogation, they confessed to have committed the offence and recovered the motor bike, knives, blood stained clothes. Later, they were sent to judicial custody at District Jail, Karimnagar on the sarrle dav. I 4 \ Thereafter, the Investigatir-rg Offrcer seized the offence video from the shop of tl-Ie petitioner, examined the citcd and independent witnesses, collected caste certificate, medica-l certihcate of the petitioner and sent MOs to t1-re FSL and collected the FSL report' Thereafter on 09.05.2025, received a registered post with a petition and memory card, in which the petitioner stated that on o2.O5.2O25 betrveen O3:30 PM and 04:00 PM both the accused (Ragula Rajasekhar & Bonagiri Rajender Kumar) attacked him with knives to kill him. After recording the sarne, the Investigating Officer served notice to the petitioner on 21.06.2025 & O2.O7.2025 for providing the source of the video forthepurposeofinvestigationartdtoensurethegenuinenessof the video for the purpose of evidence. Inspite of giving the reasonable time and repeaied requests, the petitioner failed to produce the same. As and when sufficient evidenie is available, a supplementary cha-rge sheet will be filed as per Section 193(9) of BNSS. After completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer lrled charge sheet on 26.07.2025 under Section 193 of BNSbeforethelearnedSpecialJudgeforTrialofCasesunder SCs / STs (POA) Act - cum - III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Karimnagar (for short "trial court") and C'C' number is awaited. It is further submitted that tJle writ petition be dismissed on the following grounds: 5 (1) Cr.No.97/2O21 under Section 364, 3O2, 2O1 reod. u-tith Section 34 of IpC of pS God_auarikhani _ I 0), uherein the petitioner Cheemala Thirupathi, A1_Ragull.a Rajashekar alias Shadow, A2 - Bonagii Rajeid.ra Kumar alirzs Rakesh in the instant case iad killed tte father Bandai Mogili on uhom the petitioner is expressing suspicion. TLe tial in Cr.No.97/2O21 u.tas commenced, the chief examination of LW.l tDas completed on 23.07.2025 and case posted for cross_ examination of the complainant on 1 j.OS.2O2S. (2) It is clearly mentioned in the Charge Sheet that the inuestigation with regard to the uid.Zo clip is und.er progress and as and uhen the sufficient euid,ence is auailable, a supplementary charge sleet tuill be fiIed- under Section 193(9) of BNSS. P) Dunng *te inuestigation, the inuoluement of alleged, suspecls, tuho are family members and uictims in Cr.No.97/2O21 under Secflons 364, 302, 2O1 reod. u_tith 34 of IPC of PS Godauarikhani-I (T) not yet established. ft) The petitioner mentioned in his wit petition that the Tlleged suspects Bandari Kumar, Band.ai Siniuas, Bandai Lakshmi, Stuaroopo and their close ossociate Saddanapu Shiua Kumar uLere gathered in one bar and- re.staurant utherein theg all utere planned a conspiracg to kill the petitioner. The uideo submitted bg. the petitiiner only shouing the atteged Sadd.anapu - Shiui Kumor, except him none of ang a eged suspecrs are in the uid.eo and i.t clearlg reuealing that the petitioner intentionallg mentioned the names Bandari Kumar, Bandai $riniuai, Bandari LakshmL Sutaroopa in his writ petition, who are the ege-tuitnesses in Cr.No.97/ 202 j. @ fhe petitioner is a rou_tdg sheeter inuolued in seueral cimes. (6) TLe petitioner failed to produce the source of uid.eo. He said that unknotun person tLvown a pen ditie in his house, which is not belieuable as his hiuse sunounded. by the CCTV cameras. (7) Hou,teuer, in the uideo the conspiracg of alleged. respondents not established ond it is und.er pro-be. "

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 6 I I \'1 - 6 7 . Learned Assistalt Government Pleader for Home submits that since charge sheet has been filerl and if the petitioner has any objection, the petitioner ought to have filed protest petition, pending beforc the tria-l court and instead of that has filed the Writ Petition, which deserves to be dismissed.

8. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has no information regarding frling of the charge sheet before the trial court and that since the charge sheet has been hled, the petitioner would take appropriate steps.

9. In that view of the matter, this Writ Petition is disposed of enabling the petitioner to pursue the remedies as available under law subsequent to the filing of the charge sheet.

10. Accordingly, with the above clirections, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. r As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending in this petition, if any, sha1l stand closed. SD/. A.H.S. GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTI N OFFICER To, \ 1 . The Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, TS Secretariat, State of Telangana, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

2. The Director General of Police, Telanangana State, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad 3. The Commissioner of Police, Ramagundam, Peddapalli District, Telangana. 4. The AssistantCommissioner of Police, Ramagundam, Peddapalli District, Telangana.

5. The lnspector of Police, ll-Town Police Station, Godavarikhani, Peddapalli District,Telanga na. '' ri;; t. :i.,-:.4 l 6 The SHO of porice' r-Town police station, Godavarikhani, peddapari 7. One CC to SRt CH.VEN B rwo ccs to Gp FoR Hffi H:HT:;:"J;'ro 9. Two CD copies. ,u.' w -'rrE' I rrv' I \-uult lor Ine State of Telangana. [oUT] BsK 0 c. District : ' I !". .-!i- -r' j"-l$r;,-!. . r HIGH COURT DATE D : 1 210812025 -_--|::_ ,rr:--.-.' r' - tl ^tt- /./...'-' r I A' 1 0 sEP 2[25 I ORDER WP.No.23758 of 2025 \ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 111V