PSVS Manasaveena v. 1. The Director General of Police

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidztvit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondents No. 1 to 3 to take necessary action against the respondent:; no. 4 to 9 through register the FIR for breach of the trust criminal intimidation and their systematic obstruction. of the justice, misusing their State Powers , c,eused targeted severe harassment, insult, harm, blackmail, mental agony,irreparable loss, severe hardships forthwith pending disposal of the main writ petition lA t*O: 2 OF 2025 ,1 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 provide/grarrt the police protection to the petitioner and her senior citizen mother from any further harassment or intimidation forthwith pending disposal of the main writ petition counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. PSVS MANASAVEENA PARw-lN-pERSoN counselfor the Respondent Nos. 1to3&10: sRl M. sRlNtvAS, AGp FoR HOME Counselfor the Respondent Nos.4to9: -- The Court made the following: ORDER l:t ,i' J. ;.i'#; THE HONOURABLE SRIIUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR ORDER: Heard Ms.t€VS Manasaveena, party-in-persory appearing for the petitioner and Sri.M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.L to 3 and 10. With their consent, this writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. This writ petition has been filed seeking the following prayer:- "to declare the action of the Respondents Nos.I to 3 to take necessary action against tlw Respondent Nos.4 tn 9 for breach of the trust, crininal intimidation and their systematic obstruction of the justice, misusing their State Pouters, caused targeted seaere harassment, insult, harm, blaclonail, mental agony, iruqarable loss and also increased the crime rate tou:ards tlu Petitioner and hcr Mother(senior citizens)/ Victims with their hand in glooe with the accused ?ersons who haoe done cimes toasards tlw Petitioner mtd hcr Motlur (senior citizens)/ Victims but tlrc Respondent Nos.2 and 3 hwe not taken any action against the Responilent Nos.4 to 9 tlu Petitioner maile tlu complaints before thl 3d Responilent dated on 1,8.04.2025, 2L.04.2025, 23.04.2025, 29.04.2025 and 25.06.2025 and also made tfu complaints before the 2"d Respondent ilated on 21.04.2025 and on 29.04.2025 and also sent more than L0 emails is illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the prwisions of BNS Act and as well as tlu fundamantal rights guaranteed undcr tlu Cnnstitution'of India consequently direct tlu respondents Nos.l to 3 to talce necessary action against the respondents No.4 to 9."

3. Brief facts stated in this writ petition are that the petitioner made a complaint before respondent No.5, statiirg that the Association Mernbers of Vertex Premia Aparhnents had attacked her on L6.02.2025 and on such complaint FIR No.243 of 2A?5 und-er Section 74,352,35L(2) read with 3(5) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (herein after referred as'BNSS') and Section 354,504,506 rdad with 34IPQ dated 20.02.2025 was registered. It is further submitted that one Ms.Anuradha, resident of Flat No.E-203, Vertex {;"""f#; Premia Apartrnents, made a false complaint agairut petitioner and her mother and the rr:spondent No.4 registered FIR No.,M9 of 20?5 dated 05.o4.zozs. 2 Thereafter, respondent Nos.4 to 9 were calting and threatening the petitioner to comprcmise and withdraw the case in FIR No.243 of 2025. Flence, petitioner on 18.04.2025, 21.04.2025, 23.04.2025, 29.04.2025 and ?5.06.2025 made complaints against police officer i.e., respondent Nos.4 to 9 and requested the respondent authorities to take action agairut respondent Nos.4 to 9. Howe'rer, till date no action is initiated. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed.

4. Leanred Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.L to 3 and L0 placed on record instructions issued by Assistant commissioner of Police, Kukatpally Division, Cyberabad Commissionerate, wherein it is stated that the petitioner submitted representaticn to respondent Nos.2 and 3, stating that she is residing at Vertex Prernia Apartments, Nizampet road, Medchal-Malkajgiri District and on poor maintenanct: of the said apartment, petitioner sent notice to the Association members of the Vertex Premia Apartments, due to which the association members attacked her on 16.02.20?5, hence, the petitioner made a complaint before respondent No.5 and when respondent No.5 refused to register a case, petitioner ap,proached respondent No.3 and on his instmctions) respondent No.5 registered crime No.243 of 20?5 under Section 74,9s2,351(2) read with 3(5) of BNSS and section 354, 504, sol read with 34 FC, dated 20.o2.202s. rt is further submitted that one'Ms.Anuradha, resident of Flat No.E-203, made a 'ii false compla:nt against the petitioner and her mother and the responde:rt '1';"S . ,.,.: . ; I I I I 3 No.5 registered crime No.449 ot20?s under section z9,gs2,gs1(2) BNSS dated

05.04.2025. Thereafter, petitioner alleged that on (Js.M.zozs ;g;td, 10.04.20?s, respondent No.5 called petitioner and forced her to compromise with Ms.Anuradha. Thereafter, respondent No.7, in respect of crime No.449 of 20?S issued notice under Section 35(6) BNSS dated 14.04.2025 and conversed rudely with the petitioner and her mother. In pursuant to the petitioner,s representations, respondent No.2 aide letter bearing No.g43/4c /cyB/zozs dated 21.05.2025 and Deputy Commissioner of police, Balanagar Zone, Cyberabad aide Endorsement dated 27.05.2025 directed respondent No.3 to conduct enquuT/ and submitreport.

5. subsequently, respondent No.3 qide letter No.l47/4C/ ACp- KP/cyb/2025 dated 70.07.20?s, submitted report to the respondent No.Z stating that on petitioner's complaint crime No.2rt3 of 20?S was registered on the file of respondent No.5 and after investigation charge sheet in c.c No'1286 of 2025 was filed before the trial court. With respect to complaint from Ms.Anuradha, it is submitted that crime No.449 of Zl2lwas registered and respondent No.Z issued notice under Section 35(3) BNSS to the petitioner and her mother and. was only conducting investigation. After completion of investigation, charge sheet in the said crime is filed before the concerned court, however, CC number is awaited. It is further submitted that on

05.04.2025, the petitioner lodged a.complaint before the respondent No.5 stating that while she was leaving. the aparhent in her car,1l ladies residing in the same apartments abused hLr in frignry hnguage and requeFted to take action. on such complaint, crime'Nol,i5o or 2025 under section g2g(4),126e), r.,i:S /t'tl .,,- I 4 352, 35]:i,2) read with 3(5) BNSS was registered and respondent No.5 conducterl investigation and recorded statements of 17 witnesses. During the course of investigation, no evidence or proof of offence were established., hence, respondent No.6 made a requisition to the respondent No.3 to accord permissio:r to refer the case as Lack of Evidence. Accordinglp respondent No.3 after going through the c.D file, nide procbeding No.519/ACp- KP/C\B/2025 dated 30.06.2025, accorded permission to refer the case as Lack of Evidence. After serving notice to the petitioner, the final report as,,Lack of Evidence" was filed before the concerned Court on04.02.2025.

6. It is further submitted that on 14.05.2025, the petitioner lodged another complaint before the respondent No.5 stating that on 05.04.2025 around 2.00 P.M, some women owners of the apartments made criminal attempts on her t?' and her mother and after lodging complaint when petitioner was retuming to her flat, sht: found that her car's left mirror had been intentionally damaged by their neighbours. on such complaint, crime No.619 of 20?s under section 329(2),3(5) BNSS dated L4.05.2025 was registered and during the course of investigatior, the allegation made by the petitioner against 7 womm was not proved, hence, the investigation officer made a requisition to respondent No.3 to accord permission to refer the case as Lack of Evidence. Accordingly, respondent No.3 after going through the c.D file, oid,j proceeding l No.58IACI'-KP/CYB/ 2o2s dated. 1g.06.20?s accorded permission to refer the case as [,ack of Evidence. Af.ter serving notice to the petitioner, the final report as "[,ack of Evidence" waE" filed before the concemed Court on ,,, , .:..'..$, 26-07.2025.It is further submitted that the respondent Nos.S to 9, never ever ,.1 I ,I ::.1 5 have deviated from their legitimate duties as they have initiated immediate action on all the complaints made by the petitioner. ft is also stated that respondent No.5 did not show any sort of favouritism to said Ms.Anuradha- complaint in Crime No.449 of 20?5.

7. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on inskuctions submits that the allegation by the petitioner against respondent Nos.L to 3 in not taking action against petitioner's representations are baseless as the respondent No.3 conducted detailed enquuy andoide report dated 70.07.2025 revealed that the allegations made by the petitioner against respondent Nos.5 to 9 are false and baseless, hence, no action was initiated against respondent Nos.5 to 9.

8. In the case on han4 it is pertinent to note that on petitioner's representations, respondent No.2 aide letter bearing No.*a3l aC/ CYB/2025 dated 27.05.2025 and Deputy Comrnissioner of Police, Balanagar Zone, Cyberabad, oide Endorsement dated 27.05.2025 directed respondent No.3 to conduct enquiry against respondent Nos.S to 9 and submit report. Thereafter, respondent No.3 oide letter No.147 /4C/ ACP-KP/Cyb/2025 dated 10.07.2025, submitted detailed report stating that the allegation made by the petitioner against respondent Nos.S to 9 are false and baseless. It is also pertinent to note that on petitioner's complaint dated 20.02.2025, Crime No.243 of 2025 was registered and charge sheet in C.C.No.1285 of 20?5 was filed before the hial court and. the same is pendingftr trial.,With respect to other complaints dated

05.04.20X5 and 14.05.2025,. silxi6$rere was no evidence, the respondent authorities after going through the C.D file accorded permission to close the 6 said complaints as "Lack of Evidence" and ttre same were communicated to the petitioner.

9. Ha'ring considered the above and in view of the fact that respondent No.3 had conducted detailed enquiry against respondent Nos.S to 9 and submitted report before respondent No.2 stating that the allegation made by the petitioner against respondent Nos.5 to 9 are false and baseless and since the respordent authorities have filed charge sheet in C.C.No.1286 of 2025 (pertaining; to Crime No.243 of 2025) and the same is pending before the trial Court, the petitioner may peruse her remedy as available under law before the trial corrrt in C.C.No.1286 of 2025.

10. Wittr the above observation, this writ petition is disposed. of. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. No order as to costs. To, Sd/.B.REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER Malka.rgiri District

1. The Director General of Police, for the state of Telangana at Hyderabad. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Gachibowli, Cyberabad a. The Assistant Commissioner of Police(ACP), Kukatpally, Cyberabad, Medchal 4. The p.incipal Secretary Horne Department Secretariat Buildings, 5. One'C'C to Ms. PSVS MANASAVEENA, PARTY-IN-PERSON [OPUCI 6. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME;High Court for the State of Telangana at T.S.,Hyderabad. Hyder;abad [OUT-]

7. Two CD Copies BM PMK\k I ...s. J HIGH COURT DATEtt:0210912025 ORDER WP.No,26079 ot 2025 I II{E S lt r ) ! i 6 r[8 202ti * DISPO$ING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOIUT COSTS ,e 1O Xr,o i' c{&r;