Disposed

Ahsan Ahmed Shaker v. The State of Telangana and 2 others

Telangana HC14 Jun 2023WP/9839/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the petitioner's frequent summonses and detention by police without a registered FIR, alleging violation of fundamental rights. The High Court disposed of the petition, directing police to refrain from summoning or harassing the petitioner absent due legal procedure.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed; police directed not to summon or harass petitioner without following due procedure of law pending disposal.

Ahsan Ahmed Shaker Vs The State of Telangana and 2… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32e6 ]

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERAB,AD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 9839 OF 2023

¶8

Between:

¶9

Ahsan Ahmed Shaker, S/o.Akhter Ahmed Shaker Aged 41 yrs, Occ Business Rl/o. H.No.19-2-23lM/18 Mecca Colony, Near Boston Mission High school Kalapather, Tadban, Bahadurpura, Hyderabad-64

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The State of Telangana, Rep its Principal Secretary Home Department Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

¶13

2 The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad City Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, TS .7 The Station House Officer, Kalapather Police station Nampally, Hyderabad, TS

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent no.3 in frequently calling the petitioner to the^police station and detaining^{the petitioner for long} hours without there being any^{FIR or case registeredagainst the petitioner and} without following due^{processof law as illegal arbitrary and violative of article 14,} 21 and 22 of lndian^{constitutionand againstthe principlesof natural justiceand} consequently direct^{the respondentno.3 to restrain frominterferingwith the} personal life and liberty of^{the petitioner herein Ahd further directthe respondent} no.3torestrainfromtakinganycoerciveStepsagainstthepetitionerherein without following due^{process of law.}

I t

I l

lA NO: 1 OF 2023

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent no.3 to restrain from interfering with the personal life and liberty of the petitioner herein And further direct the respondent no.3 to restrain from taking any coercive steps against the petitioner herein without following due process of law pending disposal of the main writ petition/.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI KHAJA ZIAUDDIN

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR HOME

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

¶25

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

¶26

1[I.P.No.9839 of 2O23

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief:

¶29

'...to issue a Writ order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.3 in frequently calling the petitioner to the police station and detaining the petitioner for long hours without there being any FIR or case registered against the petitioner and without ,following due process of law as illegal arbitrary and Violative of article 14, 21 and 22 of Indian constitution and against the principles of natural justice and Consequently direct the respondent no 3 to restrain from interfering with the personal lile and liberty of the petitioner herein and further direct the respondent no. 3 to restrain from taking any coercive steps against the petitioner herein without following due process of law and may pass..."

¶30

It is the case of the petitioner that though no case is registered against him, the respondent No.3 officials are summoning the petitioner to police station and made him to sit for hours together and harassing on one pretext or the other. Specific instances have been mentioned in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition,

¶31

)

¶32

stating that on O1.O4.2023 at about s.P.M, the^{officials of} respondent No.3 came to the house of the petitioner and when^the petitioner was not available, the police stood outside the house of the petitioner and keeping surveillance on the petitioner and further the family members are also summoned to appea,r before the^police without even informing any reasons.

¶33

The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home has submitted that a case in Cr.No.34 of 2023 has been registered again5l the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 324 r/w 34 I.P.C. For the purpose ol investigation into the said crime, on reliable information, the petitioner was called to the police station for enquiry purpose. Infact, the respondents have not interfered with the personal liberty of the petitioner or his family members in any manner and the respondents will take appropriate action if the petitioner's presence.is required in future by following due process of law.

¶34

Since, no crime is registered against the petitioner as per the submissions made by the Assistant Government Pleader, this Court

¶35

deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, directing the police not to call the petitioner to the police station and harass the petitioner, violating his personal liberty in any manner, except by following the due procedure prescribed in law.

¶36

With the above said observations, Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶37

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶38

SD/. G. SIREESHA ASSISTANT BEGISTRAR //rRUE COPY/I ctrt) SECTION,OFFICER

¶39

To, 1. The Principal^{secretary, Stateof Telangana, Home Department Secretariat} Buildinqs, Saifabad,^HYderabad. z. ih" Co?nriisioner^{of Police, Hyderabad City Bashee.rbagh,Hyderabad' TS} 3. The station^{House officer, Kalapather Police station Nampally,HyoeraDao,} +. On" CC to SRI^{KHAJA ZIAUDDIN Advocate} [OPUC] S. two CCs to GP^{FOR HOME, HighCourt for the State of Telangana luu ll} 6. Two CD CoPies. BSK s, GJP T--

¶40

¶41

I I I l I I i F & III! 1 It I I i i I i I i

¶42

HIGH COURT

¶43

DATED:1410612023

¶44

1\1= S 'l4?.c
.Jt'
Y
?sn
ooJ $l J11L tlI
,)
*
liia
1:!:a '

¶45

ORDER

¶46

WP.No.9839 of 2023

¶47

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶48

1
o1 L<br>L--
I
W
ScN

Ahsan Ahmed Shaker v. The State of Telangana and 2 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ahsan Ahmed Shaker v. The State of Telangana and 2 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammed Shafeeq Ahmed Vs The State of Telangana

Dr. Ponagoti Kishan Rao, Vs The state of Telangana

D. Shiv Prasad Vs The State of Telangana

Gunda Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana And 3 Others

Smt. Perelli Jyothi Vs The State of Telangana

G. Uday Kiran Vs The State of Telangana