The High Court · 2025

the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to issue order(s) or direction to the Respondents no.4 not to communicate with the Petitioner in any form except by way of written notices strictly as permitted by raw in the interests of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI POCHA|AH DORISHETTT FOR SMT. PEETHALA MANGESWARI SWAPNA Counsel for the Respondents: AGp FOR HOME The Court made the foltowing: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR Writ Petition No.32885 of 2o25 ORDER: Heard Sri Pochaiah Dorishetti, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents. With their consent, this writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. This writ petition is filed seeking the'following prayer: "...Questtoning the action of respondent No.4 in calling the petitioner to the police station without informing the reason or issuing ang notice and the present wnt petition i.s fited with a consequential prager seeking direction to the respondent No.4 not to harass the petitioner or to come to police station ..."

3. The facts of the case in brief are that petitioner is a freelance software engineer. Petitioner received a phone call from number O8712663217 on 28.10.2025 wherein the person calling had introduced himself as Mr. Naidu from Jeedimetla Police Station and asked the petitioner to be present at the Jeedimetla Police Station on the same day. Later the petitioner enquired for the reason and it was informed to the petitioner that nothing can be informed 1 through phone call and asked the petitioner to come to the Jeedimetla Police Station. Ho,urrever, petitioner sought time for trvo days time which was refused by him. Thereafter, the petitioner out of fear shifted to her parents prace and whe, she searched for the Jeedimetla police station in Google, she understood that Mr. Naidu is the Sub- Inspe:ctor of Police at Jeedimetla police Station and the numl>er he had called her is his officiar phone number. Petiti,rner submits that the action of the respondent is violative of Section rz9 (1) of tINSS urhich exemprs women from attending police statio.. The relevant section is extra<:ted for reference as under: "179. (1) Any police officer making an inuestigation under this chapter mag, bg order in utriting, require the attend.ance before himself of anA person being within the ltmits of hts own or ang ad.joining station who, from the information giuen or otherutise, appears to be acquainted with the facts and. ciranmstances of the case: Prouided that no male person under the age of fifteen Aears or aboue the age of sixtg Aea"rs or a woman or a mentallg or physicattg dtsabled" person or a person with aqtte illness shalt be required to attend at ang place other than the place in which such person J restdes: Prouided further that if .such person ,s uilling to attend the police station or at any other place within the limits of such police station, such person may be permitted so to do." 4 The petitioner further submits that as per the guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in "Arttesh Kumq.r a. Stqte of Bihar"l: AIR 2014 SC 2756, the police are bound to issue Section 4l-A notice if they find any reason or basis to investigate the complaint and the petitioner submits that due to the illegal and outrageous actions of the Police, had lost confidence in the Police as they are bound to follow due process of law and to ( safeguard her life, limb and personal liberty. Questioning the action of the respondent No.4, the present vi'rit petition is filed.

5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on instructions would submit that respondent No.4 is not calling, harassing, threatening, pressurizing or interfering with the petitioner's personal life, liberty or civil disputes and no coercive steps are taken against the petitioner in any manner. I zo r+ 1s; sccz73 4

6. Having considered the above facts and ci.cumstances, and recording the submissions of rearned Assistant Government pieader for Home and without exllressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this writ pet-ition is disposed of directing the respondent No.4 to follo"r'due procedure contemplated under law before taking an5, action on the petitioner. 7. with the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of' Miscellaneous apprications, if any pending, shalr stand closed. No order as to costs. //TRUE COPYII To 1 Thr: Station House Gajularamaram road, Officer, Near SECTION OFFICER us Stand, Shapurnagar, L. VIJAYA LAXMI REGTSTRAR

2. Ont; CC to SMT. p 3. Two CCs to Gp Hyderabad. IOUTI ,bt 4. rwc CD copies -MP/DAN EETHALA MANGESWARI SWAPNA, Advocate [OpUC] for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana at HIGH COURT DATED:3011012025 o() t * 1 'r1tr s 1 2 llAR 2l17f, 2 t ORDER WP.No.32885 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS ). ,) \1 )A