✦ High Court of India · 28 Nov 2025

The High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 28 Nov 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
28 Nov 2025
Bench
Not available
Length
1,132 words

B. Ravi Kumar, S/O B. Govinda Rao, Age 26 Years, Occ. Private Employee, R:/O Room No. 304, Sri Lairmi Balaji Men's PG, Madhapur, Ranga Rdddy District, Telangana. Jgpuri Bharg_avi Sai Priyanka., ,D/0 Not Known To The Petitioner Aged About 35 Years Oar Private Employee, Madhapur, Ranga Reddt District, Telangana. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Anide 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to iss-ue any writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the Respondent No. 3 considering the petitioner's representation dated 17.11 .2025 for not conducting the enquiry against the Respondent No. 4 and 5 and who declined registering crime against the Respondent No 4 herein which is illegal, arbitrary in the interest of lustice and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper ir the circumstances in the interest of justice. Consequently direct respondent 2 nd 3 to register the complaint made by the petitioner daled 17 .11.2025 against respondents 4 and 5 and take up the investigation there of pending disposal of lhe main writ petition Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI M MADHAVI LATHA Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3: AGP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 4 &5: -- The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR Writ Petition No.363O4 of 2025 DATtr: 28.11.2025 Between Koppula Harshavardhan ReddY Petitioner AND The State of Telangala, represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and others. ...Respondents. oRDER: This writ petition has been filed seeking the following prayet: "...declaing the inaction of the Respondent No.3 consideing the petitioners representation dated 17.11.2025 for not conducting the enquiry against the Respondent Nos.4 and 5 and who declined registeing cime against the Respondent No.4 herein uthich is illegal, arbitrary in the interest of justice and pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper in the the interest of justice and circumstances in consequentlg direct respondent Nos.2 and 3 to register the complatnt made by the petitioner dated 1 7. 1 1 .202 5 against respondents No.4 and 5 and take up the inuestigation ttereof pending disposal of the main urit petition. .."

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistalt Government Pieader for Home appearing on behaif of ii2ti respondent Nos.l to 3. With their consent, th s writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission tage. Notice to respondent Nos.4 ald 5 is hereby dispensed u,i h

3. The facts of the case in brief are thal petitioner claims to be Entrepreneur engaged in an innovativ: startup venture that connects hospitals, patients and digital ledical systems through a duly registered business platform. [1 s submitted that respondent Nos.4 and 5 becarne acquainted rv th the petitioner through professional association and volur [arily expressed interest in supporting his business model. Tht'r eafter, thcy have contributed a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- jointJl as a business participation, however, there was no written r - oral agreement stipulating any interest or profit sharr: Subsequently, respondent Nos.4 and 5 started demandinr interest at an exorbitant rate to obtain wrongful gain. Therc Lfter, respondent Nos.4 ald 5 started harassing the petitioner b.', visiting his office and also residence by trespassing. When th: r threats failed, respondent Nos.4 and 5 lodged a fa-lse r rmplaint before Madhapur Police on 04.11.2024 which was r:gistered as FIR No.1465 of 2024 with the allegations of cheati. rg and breach of ::3:: trust. In that regard, petitioner has made a representation on

17.11.2025 to respondent officials to take action against respondent Nos.4 and 5. Since no action is forthcoming, the present writ petition is filed

4. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Gachibowli Police Station has placed a copy of instructions through learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home and would submit that petitioner has sent the complaint dated 17.11.2025 through Post to respondent No.2 which uras unsigned. However, basing on the said complaint respondent authorities made GD trntry and the petitioner after sending complaint did not approach the Police Station along with relevant documents. As such, respondent No.2 sent notice to the petitioner through Post on 22.11.2025 stating that as and when the petitioner approaches the Police Station with signed complaint ald relevant documents, necessary action will be initiated as per law.

5. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he would make a fresh complaint before respondent authorities and prayed this Court to pass appropriate orders to that effect I ::4t.

6. Recording the submissions made by l: rrned counsel on either side, this Writ Petition is disposed of ,3 'anting liberty to the petitioner to approach respondent authr rities ald file a fresh complaint. Once such complaint is mrr le by petitioner, rcspondent authorities shall consider the same and take appropriate action strictly as per the procedt re contemplated under law. Miscejlaneous petitions, if any, pend I g in this writ petition shall stand closed. No costs. SD/.S. IV qLLIKARJUNA RAO ASI; STANT REGISTRAR / -i- SECTION OFFICER //TRUE COPY// To, '1 . The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secr? ariat, The State of Telangana, Hyderabad

2. The Station House Officer, Station House Officer, Garl ibowli Police Station, llT Junction Road (Beside JNIDB, Opposite DLF Iuilding), Gachibowli, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500 032.

3. The Commissioner Of Police, Cyberabad Police Cc nmissionerate, Main Road, Near Care Hospital / Near Gachibowli Flyover, O chibowli, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500 032.

4. One CC to SRI M MADHAVI LATHA, Advocate IOPUCI 5. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State ) Telangana. [OUT] 6. Two CD Copies BS M/ .ffi n HIGH COURT DATED:2811112025 ORDER WP.No.36304 of 2025 ,'i-'.il-:,,i-i' -'' , . -':\ '( ti j .,1;l LiE i .l !-a or-- r,-,- - ' .1L": DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS 1 9b

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments