Kummari Ashok 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 a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring the action of the respondent No-4 in harassing the petitioner by threatening to register false criminal cases against him on reports given by Respondent No - 5 as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondent No.4 not to harass the petitioner by making calls/summoning him to police station in the interest of justice .' *q*. ,-v ..:tt ':.:-ir'..r.- .,// lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the ci-cumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cour may be pleased to direct the respondent No.4 not to harass the p:titioner by making calls/summoning him to Police Station in the interest of justi:,e Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. THAKUR CHANDRA KAMr\L SINGH Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to4: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.S:-- The Court made the following: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.2382L of 2o25 ORDER: Aggrieved by the action of respondent No.4 in harassing the petitioner by threatening to register false criminal cases against him on the reports given by respondent No.5, the present Writ Petition is filed.

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for petitioner submits that no relief is sought against respondent No.5. As such, notice to respondent No.5 is dispensed.

3. The brief facts of the case as stated are that there are feu, finalcial disputes between the petitioner and one person by name Habeeb, who has threatened to lile criminal cases, if the petitioner does not act according to his whims ald fancies. The said Habeeb has earlier given a complaint against the petitioner at Masab Tank police station. The petitioner has immediately responded to the phone call and he was advised by the Masab Tank Police to compromise the matter out of the police station with Habeeb. Therea_fter, the said Habeeb instigated respondent No.S to take responsibility of collecting amounts from the petitioners. The respondent No.S has been violent since last one month many times and threatened the petitioner to face dire \- -a" I I I I 2 l consequences, if thc petitioner does not heed to their demands of extortion. On 04.08.2025, on lO:41 AM, the pt:titioner received a phone call from Head Constable by name Rajamoni Kiral Kumar from his mobile nunrber, by whicit, thr.: petitioner was summoned immediately to Maheswhwararq r:rolice station - respondent No.4 without their being any regiritration of cases and the petitioner was threatened to face crinr.-ral cases under the influence of respondent No.5. The petition,:1. informed about the same to his counsel for legal help appre .hending several threats. Immediately, the petitioner,s coun sel called the said Head Constable by name Rajamoni Kiran Kumar. at about 1O:58 AM, in which, the respondent No.4, who dematr,:ied securing the presence of the petitioner at the police star_: tn. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the rcslt,rndent No.5 is misleading the Maheshwararl poiice - respo rdent No.4, for which the respondent No.4 is summoning the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner drarvs itttention of this Court to the incidents of harassments as sr. bmitted in the a-ffidavit and further submits that there are fir.ancial disputes between the petitioner and one Habeeb. It is l'r-Lrther submitted that without being registering any case against the petitioner, the petitioner is being summoned to the respon:lent No.4 police station. w 3

5. Sri M.Srinivas, lea_rned Assistant Government pleader for Home placed a copy of instructions issued by Sub_Inspector of Police, Maheshwaram police Station, Rachakonda commissionerate - respondent No.4, wherein it is submitted that there are some hnancial disputes between the petitioner and one Shaik Habeeb and the said Shaik Habeeb filed a complaint on

04.O8.2O25 and on receipt of the complaint, the respondent No.4 made GD entry on the same day and further addressed a letter dated 04.O8.2025 to the Assistant Commissioner of police, Matreshwaram Division, Rachakonda Commissionerate to accord permission to conduct preliminary enquiry on the above petitioner and the Assistant Commissioner of police, Maheshwaram Division has accorded permission on the same day. It is further submitted that respondent No.4 has called the petitioner to the police station for the purpose of enquiry and instead of coming and co-operating with respondent No.4 for concluding the investigation, the petitioner filed this present Writ Petition declaring the action of respondent No.4 in harassing him by registering false criminal cases.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. \ \ 4 ...4

7. Learned Assistarrt Government P1eaclcr f:rr Home further submits that if the petitioner co-operates with t_he investigation, lurther action would be taken.

8. Considering that the core issue pertains to tl-re financial disputes between the petitioner and one Sl'rr,rik I-Iabeeb, the respondent No.4 repeatedly callir-rg the petitiorrer for the said enquiry, is not appreciated. The respondent N'c 4 ought to have considered the facts on enquiry at one instancr:. hourever, if the situation demands, the respondents should follo.*. due process of law in concluding the enquiry and initiate furthe - action.

9. Hence, this Court is of the opinion to dis;pose of the writ petition directing the respondents to conclude t.LLe enquiry on the compiaint given against the petitioner as r, xpeditiously ers possible and take up for further course ol action and the petitioner has to co-operate as and when reclLtrred in order to complete the enquiry in a speedy manner.

10. With these observations, this Writ petitior. is disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscelianeous applications, pending in this petition, if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/-A. JAYASREE SIbTANT REGISTRAR A,S ,\ "! SE CTION OFFICER a i I To

1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Dr. B.R. i\r'nbedkar Telangana Secretariat Building, Hyderabad District, T.S.,Telangana State 500022. ..:,*E',re.r--.:{-':ryf'Y:-- .i:€tf*:*.Jtx'i1*":r-.'.t'tl- 'g."

2. The DGP of Police for Telangana State, Telangana State Police Headquarters LakdikaPul Rd, Opposite Ravindra Bharathi, Red Hills, Lakdi-ka-Pul, Hyderabad, Telangana 500004

3. The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda, Rachakonda Police Commissionerate, Vayupuri Colony, Beside Malkajgiri Court Complex, Neredmet, Secunderabad, Telangana State 500056.

4. The Station House Officer, Maheshwaram Police Station, Beside. Electric Sub Station, Maheshwaram, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana State - 501359 5. One CC to SRl. THAKUR CHANDRA KAMAL SINGH, Advocate IOPUCI 6. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME ,High Court for the State of Telangana. [OU1-l 7. Two CD Copies BM LS W HIGH COURT \ DATED:1 310812025 t { ORDER WP.No.23821 o12025 I 2 g SEI' l$?5 \.1 i I i I I I ! I DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 1 q q