The High Court · 2025

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 rssue a Writ, order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus directing Respondent No.1 to 6 to execute Non-Bailable Warrant issued by XV Additional Chief l\4etropolrtan Magistrate CcrL 1, Hyderabad in CC No. '1 73 of 201 8 lA NO: 1 OF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the c r rumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cour may be pleased to issue a direction to the respondents to file status report of t1 l case in CC No.173 o'f 2O18 on the file of XV Additional Chief tt4etropolit: I rlagistrate Court, Hyderabad pending disposal of main Writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI G SURESH GOUD Counsel forthe Respondent Nos. 1 to 4: SRI D. PRADEEP \GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.6: SRI R. MANGULAL Counsel for the Respondent No.7:----- The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SRIJUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI WRIT P ETITION No.44685 OF 2022 ORDER This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief ''lssue a writ. order or a dtectiort. pafticularly one nt the nature of Martdamus direcling respondent No 1 to 6 to execLie Non-bailable warrant ssued by XV Additional Chief ly'letropolitan lvlaEstrate Courl. Hyderabad in C.C No.173 of 2018.

2. Heard IVlr. G. Suresh Goud, learned Counsel for the petitioner, N/lr. D Pradeep, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and R. Mangulal, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No.6

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent Nos. 1 to 6 have failed to execute the non-bailable warrant issued against the accused/respondent No 7 in C.C. No. '173 of 2018 on the file of the learned XV Additional Chief Metropolitan lVlagistrate, Hyderabad. Hence, the present petition has been filed seeking an appropriate direction to the respondent police authorities to take expeditious steps to secure the presence of respondent No. 7 in the said criminal proceedings 2 -

4.'1 . Learned Assistant Government Pleader for [1 lme submits that, during the pendency of the Calendar Case pr>ceedings, a non-bailable warrant (NBW) was indeed isr; red against respondent No. 7, and all possible measures have ::en taken by the police authoritres to secure his presence in ac: >rdance with the procedure prescribed under the Code of Crimir i I Procedure, 1973 (Cr P.C.) 4 2. He further submits that, pursuant to the c: rmunication addressed by the lnspector of Police, WPS liouth Zone, Hyderabad, the Regional Passport Officer, Hyderabz d. vide letter dated 10 11.2025, informed that the Consulate GeI >ral of India. Jeddah has initiated impounding proceedings respect of Passport No. S3102449 held by respondent \o 7 This, according to the learned Assistant Governme rt Pleader, demonstrates that appropriate and effective measur€ s have been taken by the respondent police authorities to ensure the appearance of the accused before the trial CoL r lt is thus contended that the allegation of inaction or lack o liligence on the part of the police authorities is unfounded, anc re prays for dismissal of the writ petition 3

5. I have perused the material available on record.

6. Having regard to the grievance of the petitioner that the respondent police authorities have not taken sufficient steps to secure the presence of respondent No. 7 in C.C. No. 113 of 2018, and keeping in view the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader as to the sleps already taken, including the initiation of proceedings for impounding the passport of the accused to facilitate his appearance. it is evident that the respondent police authorities have undertaken effective measures in accordance with the prescribed procedure to secure the presence of the accused before the trial Court

7. However, considering that the execution of the warrant and production of the accused are essential for the progress of the trial, the respondent police authorities are directed to continue and expedite all necessary steps to secure the physical presence of respondent No.7 before the learned Magistrate, strictly in accordance with law and due process 4 - B. With the above direction, this petition is disp:;ed of. There shall be no order as to costs lVliscellaneous petitions, if an_v, pending in thr: retition, shall stand closed SD,.-fr/IJAYA LAKSHMI o*.l,\:]:,o'1111* ___,.; 2 //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER ,\ The Director General of police, Telangana State, Hyderil rad TheCommissionerofPolice,Hyderabad'BasheerBagtr.Hyderabad' The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central Crirn ) station' Detective Department, HYderabad The lnspector of Police, Womens Police Station, South z rne' Hyderabad' The Regional Passport Officer, Telangana at Secundet: cad' One CC to SRl. G SURESH GOUD, Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI R. IMANGULAL, Advocate [OPUC] TwoCCstoGPFoRHoIME,HighCourtfortheStater>Telangana'[oUTl Two CD Copies To, 1 2 3 4 C 6 7 8 I PVL HIGH COURT DATED:1811112025 ORDER WP.No.44685 of 2022 - :-"---_'- -:-- -i l'il: S :',- '. [.] l::; i6p i' ,i-l'. i! j,,.' '1 \,1 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS \llN'