Sirai Mohammed v. 500004, TG

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, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 5th respondent in not incorporating relevant section 109 0f BNS in crime No. 8712024 and furtheraction of the respondents 2, 3 and 5 in not taking any action on the representation of the petitioner 12.08.2025 as highly illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the constitution of lndia, apart from violative of principles of natural justice, consequently direct the respondents 2 to 5 to take action forthwith for incorporating section 109 of BNS in respect of crime No.8712024, on the file of the sth respondent, pursuant to the representation of the petitioner dated 12.08.2025. IA NO:1OF 2025 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 direct the respondents 2 to 5 to take action forthwith for incorporating Section 109 of BNS in respect of Crime No. 87/2024, on the file of the Sth respondent, pursuant to the representation of the petitioner dated 12.08.2025, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. JELLA NARESH KUMAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.6: The Court made the following: ORDER {-) o THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE TI.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No -26926 of 2O25, ORDER: This writ petition is filed questioning the action of thc <ttl respondent in not incorporating relevant Section..1O9 of BNS in Crime No.87/2024 and further action of respondent Nos.2,3 and 5 in not taking any action on the represcntation of the pctitioner datcd L2.O8.2O25 as highly illegal, arbitrary and in violat.ion o[ Articlc l4 of the Constitution of India and consequently, seeking a direction to the respondent Nos.2 to 5 to take action forthrvith for incorp<lratirrg Section 1O9 of BNS irr respect of Crime |'1o.87 of 2024 on Lhc fitt' oi'the 5ft respondent.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a resident of Sirgapur Village ancl Mandal, Sangareddy. On 17.L1.2024, whilc the petitioner was standing near a tea stall in his village, one of the villager namely Mr. Shaik Mujaheed (6tt' respondent herein) was quarrelling with a person in respect of an old chit fund and w'hr:tr the petitioner went there and enquired as to why they are quarrelling, the 6th respondent questioned why the petitioner is interfering and abused him in most filthy language and without stopping thcrc, the 6ft respondent took a scissor frdm an acljercent t)an Shop and bcat. the petitioner with it and due to the said attac:k by the 6tr respondenl., the petitioner sustained bleeding injury to his teft cheek along with \I \ 2 sevcrtll internal injuries to his face, which resulted in facial d-vsft,r-rction ror several months and even novr the nerves on one side of his rirce a.r: not functioning. It is rurther submitted that apart from farcizrl injurir:s, the petitioner sustainccr murtiple injuries to his body and r*ers bed ridden for months together. It is submitted that after a'aili.g mr:dical treatment on LT.Ir.2024. the petitioner made a coml>lnint r-rn 19.12.2024 to the 5th responde,t on 1g.1i .2024 against (>tlt rc:sp{lndcnt along with relevant medical certificates. lt is further sut;nritted tl'iltt based on the said c<-,mplaint ancl medical certificate, tl'rr';:'i' rr:spoudcnt rcgistered a crime againsL thc 6rrr rcspondent vide F-'l'l('No'87 ttl 2024 for the off'ences purrishablc under Scciions 1lB (1) and 3ii2 of IJNS but, failecl to i.corporate scction 109 of BNS. It is firrth.r subnritted that 6rh rcspondcr-rt inrcntionally attackecr the pcliti,,cr a^cl brought thc scissor lrorn the arljacent pan shop and attacl<<:cl rhe pe titioner anc t.hereby caused serious and grave injury to Lhc prr:iiLionc:r, which lead to sevcrc suffcri.g by the petitioner for m()irrii:; togcthcr arnd it would lead to thc death <lf the petitioner. It is furLhc. submitted that petitioner enquired with Sfr respondent as to rn'hy Sr:ction i09 of BNS is not incorporated in the F-.r.R but, sth rcsp<;.dent did not give reply, aggrievecl by which the petitioner made a dct:riiccl representation to the 2'd respondent dated 12.og.2o25 and s<rught for re-investigation into crime No.g7 of 2ot24, now pending vicle c.c.No.1 i 9 of 2o2s on the file of Junior civil Judge cum Judicial M;igisir:rLc t-rf l.'irst Class, Narayanakhed but, as of , \ \ r,--l J action has been initiated, challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed

3. Learned Government Pleader appearing for Home placed the instructions submitted by the Sub-lnspector of Police, Sirgapur l)olice Statiol, wherein it is submitl.ed that petitiont:r has given complaint dated 18.1 1 .2024 to the 5th respondent stating that on 17.11 .2024 at 2l3O hours when he was at the Tea shop of Pandaricha, his villagcrs Mr. Abdul Nayeem and Mr. Shaik Mujayid @ Baba were quarrclling with each other with regard to old chits and he intervened to <;onsole them, on that Mujayicl started abusing him in filthy languagc and "why are you coming here iu the middle", and took scissors [r<lm the nearby pan shop, ancl also bcal him with scissors over his lctt sicle cheek and caused bleeding injury, meantime his villager Mr- Firoz and Bhagava Gouse rescued him ancl thercaftcr, pel.iLioner wcnt Lo Lhe Government Area Hospital, Narayanakhed [or treatmcnt. After treatment, he came to police station for lodging complaint and requested to take necessary action in thc matter. It is further submitted that during the course of investigation, the Sft respondent have examined the complaint and recorded his statement and sent the complainant to the Government Area Hospital, Narayanakhr:cl for treatment, and the investigating officer has visited the scenc of oll'cnce which is situated at Sirgapur village near Pandaricha Tea Poinl and secured the presence o[ two panchas and observed the scenc and \ t\ 4 (. \, fornd incriminati.g object i.e., one scissor which was used by the accusr:d person in the commission of offence abandoned in the scene of tlllence ancl aftcr examination, the investigating officer conducted thc scc:ne-cum-scizurc panchanama and seized one scissors from thr: so('r(' .f offcnce under a cover .f panchanama before the panchas. It is I'u.Lher submitted that investigating officer examined the eye u'ifncsscs r,w-2 & L,w-4 and recorded their statements and on 20.11.2024, and servcd notice under section 35 (3) BNSS to the a<;r:ursr:d pcrsorl rvith directions to attend the court when the surrlnlons $'cre issued. It is further submitted that on 05. 12.2024, Llr. l.w -7 lDr. I?ajk.rnar, civil Assistant Surgecn, Government I-{os1;ital, Narayanaktrccl v;ho treated the LW-i lurnished the medical cci'til'r(';rl(: in whicl-r hc opined that the injur,v of Lw-2 is ,,simpie in nillttr(''' ancj etftcr completion of investigation, lhi: investigating officer lilrrcl tlrc charge sheet clateci 07.L2.2A24 bcfore thc Court of learned Judicial Nlagistrate of [.'irst class at Narayanakhed a.nd it is pending tri;iI vi<]e C.C.No. 119 o1'2025. It is fulther subrnitted that after more Lh:rir -o, monLhs, th<: petitioner has sr:nt represcntation dated 12.08.2025 staring that Section 109 of BNS was not added to crime No.B7 of 2024 and the Medical officer, Government Hospital, Nara-vanakhed has given Medical Opinion stating that the injuries are 'sirn1;lt: in narure'. hence the contention of the petitioner that the invcst-igating officer has not added section 1o9 of BNS in crime No.g7 of 2,024 is w'ithout any merit and untenable. Along with the copy of \ : ! !( ! 5 instructions, the Medical Opinion of the Civil Assistant Surgeon/Medicat Officer, Narayanakhed, Sangareddy District is liled wherein it is submitted that the injury noted was simple in nature.

4. In that view of the matter, since the respondents lrerr,,c llled charge sheet and case is numbered as C.C.No. i 19 of 2025 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Narayanakhed, the petitioner may pursue his remedies as available under law.

5. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stancl closcd. There shall be no order as to costs. SD/. AHMED ABDULLA KHAN ANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, Secretariat Buildinds, Hyderabad -500022, TG-' - 500004, TG

1. The state of Telangana, Rep by its ptilg'pq!Qecretary, Home Department, 2. The DirectoiC"n.Tiiof'Police, Government of Telangana, Hyderabad - 3. if," Srp"rintendent of Police, S-9ngg1e!dy District- 502001, TG.- 4. The Circle f nipeJtoi of Police, Kan"gti, Sang-are{dy District -502286, TG 5. The Station'iiSJJJbiii;";; Siis;pri potii""Statiori, Sansareddv District - 502287,TG. S"h;ik tvi"iaheed, S/o. Shaik Haimql,Aged!! Years, R/o. Sirgapur Village JnO wtanOal, Sangareddy District -502287, TQ d; Ce to 'sni. iEt-m'ttAnrsH KUMAR Advocate [oPUC] Two CCs to GP fOn ffOffrf f , Hign Court for the State of Telangana' [OUT] . Two CD Copies - -

6. 7 8 I CHR TKS ftq. HIGH COURT DATED:15/0912025 ORDER W.P.No.26926 ot 2025 7 :; ) /t: S 14I I I BEI .l'tt*\-- t.( .r.c t-\"... \ r-1 \:.. vA .:,.. / '.rr.'. \)\ 'l z$ffi ; -t \! t. -rc'-! .-a DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS Olrtt'\'{ I