High Court · 2025

4. Smt. Ayesha Naseem, w/o Mohd. Abdul Faheem Aged about !8 years, 52 years, r7o H.No. 23-1-364 Kotla Alijah, Jaffri Galli, Bahadurpura Hyderabad. 5. Arsheen, D/o Mohd.Abdul Faheem, aged about 30 years, r/o H.No. 23-1-364 Kotla Aliiah, Jaffri Galli, Bahadurpura Hyderabad.

6. Asfiya, d/o Mohd.Adul Faheem, aged about 31 years, r/o H.No. 23-1-364 Kotla Aliiah, Jaffri Galli, Bahadurpura Hyderabad.

7. Mohd. Abdul Farooq Sharoze, s/o Mohd.Abdul Waseem Aged about 2l years, rlo 23-1-21OlA-1, Kotla Ali.iah Charminar, Hyderabad.

8. Mohd.Abdul Fahad, s/o Mohd. Abdul Faheem, aged about 33 years, rio H.No. 23-1-364 Kotla Al|ah, Jaffri Galli, Bahadurpura Hyderabad.

9. Mohd. Abdul Zubaid, S/0 Mohd.AMul Faheem, aged About 26 years, rlo H.No. 23-1-364 Kotla Alilah, Jatfri Galli, Bahadurpura Hyderabad.

10.Mohd. Abdul Habeeb, s/o Mohd. Abdul Faheem, aged 23 years, r/o H.No.23- 1-364 Kotla Alijah, Jaffri Galli, Bahadurpura Hyderabad. ...PETITIONERS AND

1. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

2. The Commissioner of Police Hyderabad City, office at Basheerbagh, Hyderabad.

3. The Station House Officer Charminar Police Station, Hyderabad. 4. The Station House Officer Purana Haveli Police Station, Hyderabad. 5. Smt.Fouzia, r/o H.No- 23-1-364 Kotla Alijah, Jaffri Galli, Bahadurpura Hyderabad. l I I I l // ,// ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Afticle 226 0f the constitution of lnJ a praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, th,-, g;n6 court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or Direction, nr rre particurarry one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of thr_, Respondent police in calling the petitioners to the police stations time and agair and making them to sit for hours together at the behest of sth respondent wt tout there being any case registered and thereby causing interference with cr - personal lives and liberty, as being illegal, arbitrary and unjust and viorativs of Articre 21 of the Constitution of lndia. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2016(wPM P. NO:4 1582 0F 2016) Petition under Section 151 cpc praying that in the ircumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High co r t may be preased to direct the respondent porice not to caI the petitroners to th€ porice stations or in any manner interfere with their personat rife and riberty, p.r ding disposar of the main Writ Petition. l.A. NO: 2 OF 2o16(WPMP. NO:4349 2 0F 20161 Petition under section 151 cpc praying that in the c rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High cor. r may be preased to pass orders permitting the petitioners herein to amenc the cause tifle of Respondent No.3 and 4 as'The Station House officer, Moge pura porice Station, Hyderabad and The Station House Officer, Meerch.,rk police Station, Hyderabad" instead of "The station House officer, charrr nar police station, The Station House Officer, purana Hir.eli police Station, Hyderabad and Hyderabad" counsel for the Petitioner: sRl vEMpATl MALLIKARJUN sr{ \srRy (Nor pREsENr) Counsel forthe Respondents: SRt R.LAXMIKANTH REDDY, \cp FOR HOME The Court made the following: ORDER // I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITI ON No.33687 0F 2016 ORDER: This writ Petition is fired under Article 226 of constitution of India seeking the following relief/s:- "...to- issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent police in calling the petitioners to the fotce stations tirne and again and making them to sit for hours together at the behest of sth respondent without there being any case iegistered and thereby causing interference with our personal lives and liberty, as being llegal, arbitrary and unjust and violative of Article 2I of the Constitution of India, and to grant such other relief or reliefs as this Honble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case..... "

2. None appeared on behalf of the petitioners.

3. I have heard Mr.R.Laxmikanth Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.l to 4.

4. l,earned Assistant Government pleader for Home would submit that, the contest of the petitioner or the respondents have called the petitioners without reasoning, is improper and at the relevant time Crime No. 173 of 2Ol4 was registered against the petitioners ad in the course of investigation, the presence of the petitioner was secured. However, after due investigation, charge sheet was filed and calendar case was numbered as C.C.No.27g : i I l I 2 of 2015 on the frle of the VIII Additional Ch ef Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and after due trial, tht: petitioners was acquitted vide Judgment dated 15.11.2023, thu; the case raised in the petition does not suryive.

5. Having regard to the submissions and t re development reported in the matter and as the contest raised ry the petitioner has been redressed, this petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaleous Petitions, pending if any, shrr i stald closed. //TRUE COPY// m: Sd/.C.DEEPIKA s STANT REG|SIBAR- .SECTION OFFICER \ To, J BSR SA

1. One CC to SRt VEMpAT| MALLTKARJUN SHASTRV\ 2 L*g C9r to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the lj ate of Tetangana at Hyderabad [OUT] Two CD Copies W l\, vocate IOPUC] l t : I I I I I I I HIGH COURT DATED:2010812025 , I -u-:-_-: :rr. /...t\.-.:.. /a 04 i:; il6 ( / t ORDER WP.No.33687 ot 2016 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS, WITHOUT COSTS (' ( \ 11 \o