Babu Tukaram Yamgar v. Secretariat, Hyderabad

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI BODA VINODHAR Counsel for the Respondents: AGP FOR HOME The Court made the following: OROER ri .-il'il w THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR Writ Petition No.32969 of 2O25 This u,rit petition is filed seeking the following prayer: "...declairtg th.e actiort of Respondent No.3 in interfeing with the liJb and personaL libertg of Lhe petitioner as being illegal, arbitrary, disciminatory tuithout follouing the due process of latu and uiolatiue of Articles 14, 19 and 2l of the Constitutiort of India and consequently direct the Respondent No.3 not to interfere with the life and libertg of the petitictner uithout follotuing the due process of law..."

2. Heard learned cor-tnsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant GovernmcnI Pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondents. With their consent, this writ petition is taken up for disposal.

3. The facts of the casc in briel as stated are that on

17.10.2025, petitioner was called to Police Station by respondent No.3 and if the petitioner fails to come to Police Station, respondent No.3 i.r,ould lodge false complaints against the petitioner and his family members. Accordingly, petitioner went to respondent No.3 Police Station on 2

17.1O.2025 and he was made to wait till ev,' Lrng and vi,as asked again to come on 18.1O.2025. Orr 18.10.2025, rvithor-rt statlng anv reason, respondent No.' qr-irbbeci the petitioner's mobilc i.e., ipl-rone l4 Pro Max '"r r r I'r rnore tharr Rs.1,00,000/- a1ld made the petitioner to \ i ;it tl-re Police Station multiple times. It is submitted tl-rat 1:titioner \\'as orally abused and physically assaulted r,vitl-r r tir:r belt b,v respondcnt No.3 and u,as demanded to par, F'r .18.O0,000/- ior the assistancc given to one Manik Cho',r c an u,ho had committed offence. It is furthcr subn-rrttecl I ilt l)ctitioner s'as sevcrely injured and w,as traumatized fo- thc inhumar-r behar,'iorrr of respondent No.3. Questioning I re same. thc presen t urrit petrtion is filed.

4. The Sub Inspector of Police, EOW. ",am IX, CCS, Hvdelabacl has placed a copy of instnrc xrs through learned Assistant Government Pleader for Hor L,: and ',1-ould submit that they have received B casc files n,hrch u,ere translerrcd from Film Nagar Police Statrc u r-cgistered against one Manik Choudhary, who is the prolrrietor o[ H.Manik Jeu,ellers. The said Manik CLr udtrary has cheated several victims for crores of rupee s tlrrough his -w i 3 gold business and other means and at present, he is absconding. During the course ol inve stigation, it is revealed that petitioner hercin at-rd the said Manik Choudhary,are well acquaLnted to each othcr and that on

19.O8.2025 petitioncr arlong ri'ith the said Manik Choudharl' rvithdrerv thc plcdgcd gold ornaments from IIFL Gold Loan, Jeedimetta, tll'derabad and the said Manik Choudhary '"r,as absconding from the said date. During the course of investigation, rcspondent Policc served notices under Sectio t't 179 of BNSS, 2023 in all thc 8 cases to the petitioner and another rl'hich rl'ere duly acknorn'ledged on

18.10.2025, 24.1O.2025 and 25.10.2025 ditecting their appearancc for thc purposcr ol irrvestigatiot t. However, after securing the presettcc of llctilioncr aud anollter' they were examtned in detail, but they did not disclose any materia-l facts. It is submitted thal instead o[ cooperating ri'ith the enquiry, petitioner has filt'd Ilr( lrresrnt r'r'rrt pe tition'

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is always rcady and wilhng Lo cooperate with the investigation as and whcn required along u'itkr required documents and that respondent authorities ought to have ( I .l ^c lollowcd due procedure as contemplated I r"rder lau, for rnvestigattorl

6. Rccording the submissions of learr,cl counscl on either sidr:. this rr.rit petition is clisposeci ol r,.irr ar <lirectron to respondcnt authorities to follolr. ciuc >roc<:durc as contempla tcd lrnder lan, for further cor.l - e of action. Needless 1o state that petitioncr shall cooj).. .atc rvith the cnquin'. 'lltc pctitioncr rr] a-\, ar ail thc s€ I .rces of. any advocate rlr.rring the course of ir-r ve stigatio rt vho shall be present u ithin visible distance but not 1r :aring range during enq rrin,. . I\'f isc:cllallcous petitions, pcncling, iI an, shzrll srand <:1osed, Horr.c.,.er. there shal1 bc no order as to r osts. I SD/- VI.JAWAHAR REDDY +s( tsrANr REGTSTRAR \' / //TRUE COPYII Telangana, Hyderabad'.

1. The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Secre-ta 2. The Commisslonerate of police, Hyderabad Commissi, I fhe s^u^b tnspector d pgligp., f ,5, 6cslaiii.Eiorsri, 4. One CC to SRt BoDA VrNODHnn, ncjvociie tOprjCj 5. Two CCs to Gp FOR HOME, High'court foiifrEstatd 6. Two CD Copies \ oFFtCER \sEcTtoN r rt, State of ) rerate. l- yderabad District c Telangana. [OUT] To, MMT PSK HIGH COURT DATED:31 11012025 ORDER WP.No.32969 of 2025 iiE S f.) () 1 JA\ ?A?E ) * - ::..-._:------ DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITON WITHOUT COSTS t il,