The High Court · 2025

Petition under Article 226 ot 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 [t/andamus: i) to declare the inaction on the part of the Respondent Police in registering the crime for the offences under Secs.465, 468 and 42O of IPC corresponding to Secs.336(2), 336(3) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and investigating the same pursuant to the complaint of the petitioner to that of the Fourth Respondent dated 05.06.2025 and the subsequent complaint to that of the Third Respondent dated 19.06.2025 and the further complaint dated 01 .O7.2025 given to that of the Fourth Respondent on his advice as illegal, arbitrary, un.just apart from being violative of principles of natural justice and against the mandatory provisions un,ler Sec.1 73 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,

2023. and ii) lo consequently direct the Third and Fourth Respondent Police to register the complaint given on 19.06.2025 given to that of the Third Respondent and dated U A7.2025 to that of the Fourth Respondent by investigating the same rn a:cordance. with law and take appropriate action as against the accused who are responsible for committing the offen:es under Secs. 465,468 and 420 of IPC corresponding to Secs.336(2), 3:t6(3) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023 lA NO: 1 OF 2{t25 Petition under :lection 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in ...upport of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the 3'd and 4'h 'espondents to register the crime pursuant to the complaint dated 19.06.2025 given by the petitioner to that of the Third Flespondent and dated 01 .07.2025 to tlrat of. the Fourth Respondent by investigatir,g the same and taking appropriate act on Counsel for the Petiti:ner : M/S JURISLIT LAW LLP Counsel for the Resp:ndents: AGP FOR HOME The Court made the fr>llowing: ORDER THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.28824 of 2025 ORDER: Hc:rrd lcarned counsel for the petitioners and leanrccl Assistnrrt Gorrcrnment Plezrclcr fbr Home appearing for respondents. With their conselit this rvrit pctition is t:rkcr-r up for disposal at thc zrclmission stagc itself

2. 'l'his n,rit petition is filecl seel<ing following prayer: " . ..cleclare lh.e inaction on the part of the Respondent Police in register ry the crime for the ofJbnces under Sections 465, 468 and 42O of IPC corresponding to Sections 336(2), 336(3) and 318(4) of the Bharatigtt Nyaga Sanhita, 2023 and inuestiglating the sanrc pursuant to the complaint of the petitioner to that of the Fourth Respondent dated 05.06.2O25 cLnd the subsequent complaint to that of the Third Respondent clated 19.06.2025 and the fufther complaint dated 01 .07.2025 giuen to that of the Fourth Respontlent on his aduice as illegal, arbitrarg, unjust apart Jiom being uiolatiue of pinciples of natural justice and aqainst the mandatory prouisions under Section 173 of the Bharatiya Nagaik Suraksha Sanhita 2O23 and to consequentlg direct the Third and Fourth ResponderLts Police to register the complaint giuen on 19.06.2025 giuen to that of the Third Respondent and dated 01.07.2025 to that of the Fourth Respondent by trutestigatiq the sarne irr accord(u1ce with laut and take appropiate action as aqai't s' the accused utho cLre responsible for cotn tnt tit'Lg the offences under Sections 465, 468 and 42O ol IPC con'espondinq to Secflons 336(2), 336(3) anc) .) r8(4) of the Bharatiga Ngaya SanhittL, 2023..."

3. The iir:ts of the case irr brief as statecl are that pctitioner's father zrnrl lris clder brotl-rcr cl:rirns to be or,l,ners of land in Sy.No.192l ol' Singaredd-ypale m Village, Penpah:rd lv4andal (subject larld) ar-rcl th.rt aftcr the death of petitioner's father, petitioner came inlo l)(lssession. It is subr-nittcd that oi-re Mr.l(.Sudhakar has trcsp;rssecl into the subjcct land and caused damage to the subject 1ar r<1. Accordinglv, pctitioner lodgecl com plaint Cr.No.9!) oi 2019 belore rcspondcnt No.4 Police and respor-rdent Policc has also filed charge shect to that effect. It is submitted that tl-rc srrl;.1cc:t larrrd u,as mllt:lted b.r, Rerrcnur: Authorities in tl-re name of l( Sudhakar illegall.r.. h-r tl.rat regard, F,etitioner liled a writ petrtion in W.P.No. 16617 ol 20'l 9 beforc ':hi:; Court r.vhich is pendir-rg. It is submittecl tl-rat aftcr delibcralt: ef'forts, petitioncr came to knou, that the said K. Sudhal<ar has ilbgally forged the signaturcs oi' 1;ctitioncr's fathcr ar-rd got mut.r',ed his name in the subject lar rd. Ir-r that regard, pctitior-rcr lodge,,l another complaint to responclent No.4 on 05.06.2025. Since, resporrdent No.4 is not taking .urv action on the conrplaint, petitioner approachecl Superitt ter rdcrr t ol Police ztr-icl loclged another complaint olt I I

19.06.2025 and the samc \vas crldorseci. On 01 .O7.2025, when petitiorler approached respondent No.4, respondent No.4 asked the pctitioner to lodge ar-rother complair-rt a1-rd accordingly or-r O1 .O7.2025 pctitioner lodged another complaint, but till today, no action has bccn taken bt' responclcr-it alrthorities. On enquir-1,, on

12.O9.2025, it came to thc rrotice of petitioner that respondenl ;rrtthor-ities hzrve not rcgistcrc-rl arrv complaint for the reason thzrt they could not obtain papers from Revenue Autl-rorities. Questioning thc serme the preserlt u,rit pctition is filecl.

4. Learned Assistant Gorre rnment Pleader for Home placed a copy ol instructions issuecl b_t, Srtb Inspector of Police, Penpahzrd Police Station and rr oulcl submit thart or-r receipt of petitior-rer's complaint, respondent Police triccl Lo contact the pctitioner, hou,ever, tl-re petitior-rer did not choose to coopererte \,\,ith the enquir y and also dicl not prodr-rce any original documents to er-iab1e the responclent Policc to initiatc enquiry. After complctior-r of enqr-riry, respondent No..l closed the complaint as 'lack of evidence' and informecl the same to petitioner through post on t

23.O9.2025. It is lurther strbn-ritted lhat respondent No.3 l-ras given sulficient time to petitioner to appear and prodi-rce relevant documents, sir-rce the petitioner has not chosen to appear, the same \\'as closed. It is further submitted that in Cr.No.99/2019, ._ t-,tsil)O1t(l(' lt r,r -{ lr,rs filCri :r ('ltitt-g(' :iil('('l rl'r'l- ({)llll)l( [iotr of itrve st iga t i.,t r ur Ll. C. No.38 t) 12022.

5. Per c:orrlr':r, lcarned counsel lor the pctitiorler submits that petitioner is ar Doctor by profc'ssion and ri,orhs in Jogipet Village and M:1lrclal. Snrvapet District, as such thc pctiti,rncr coLlld not respond anci :rppcar bclorc the resl)orldent Polr( (].

6. [n tl'r at vieu' of the mattcr, this u'rit pctition is disposed of granting Iibertv to pctitioner to file frcsh compiirint, if so advised, and thercafter shall cooperatL' \\'ith thc rcspondents lor the purpose of encluir-r'. Rcspr-rndent aLlthoritics ar-t: dir ected to follow due proccd urc conternplatccl ltrrrlcr lzru lor further investigatirrn ;rr-rrl sl-rall also irct on Lh(' 1>c'nrlrrr3 ct,rnplaint dated O 1.07.202li. I :rnr.'.

7. Witl-r ti c abovc directions, this ,ur,rit periti()n is disposed ol Miscellaneor-rs applicatior-rs, if an,v pendin!{, slrall stand closed. No order as t o costs. ,TRUE COPY, SD/- P. t'ONNA KRISHNA N'-Y Sl:CTION OFFICER To, The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Dr' BR hmkredkar Secretariat' State of Telarrgana, Hyderabad. The Director {jeneral of Police, Telangana state, Lakdi- ka- pul, Hyderabad. The Superintcn63 ' rf Police, Suryapet District, Suryaf '-'t. 1 2 2 Ilt L

4. The Station House Officer, Penpahad Police Station, Penpahad, Suryapet. 5. One CC to SRl. fi//S JURISLIT LAW LLP Advocate IOPUC] 6. Two CCs to GP FOR HOTUE ,High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT] 7. Two CD Copies P\,'I t/1h,/ !/,, \ HIGH COI.JRT DATED:23rcg,2025 ORDER '. WP.No.28824 of 2025 ,t .:) o t) I I .,+ o?. tHe s i,.,. ': () 03 t'lr\J z[fi ;l,4 ict-l frO DISPOSING .CF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT C()STS 1 a t I f i