Allowed

Kothakonda Rajendra Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC20 Mar 2024WP/7256/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Disposing a writ petition challenging the arbitrary summoning of the petitioner by the police without prior notice under Section 41-A CrPC. The Court held the action illegal and directed the police to issue a notice under Section 41-A CrPC before summoning the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Directing Respondent No.3 to issue a notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and follow Arnesh Kumar guidelines before summoning the Petitioner for investigation.

Kothakonda Rajendra Kumar Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[^32s6 ]

¶2

¶3

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 7256 OF 2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

Kothalonda Rajendra Kumar, S/o.K.Madan Mohan, Aged 52 years, Occ. Business, R/o.Viila.No.61, Splendid Aparna^palm i/eadows, Konipally, Secunderabad-s00 100.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

'1- The State of Telangana, Represented by its Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, Telangana State.

¶13

The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad, Hyderabad. Telangana State.

¶14

The Station House Officer, Police Station Shankarpally, Fathepur, Shankarpally, Telangana State

¶15

M.V.Satya Prakash, S/o.M.Narsimha Rao, Aged 46 years, Occ.^private Employee, R/o. MIG-2'l 06, Serlingampally, Ranga Reddy Hyderabad.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

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 ISSUE a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or Writs, Order or Orders declaring the action of Respondents more particularly Respondent No.3 for calling the Writ Petitioner to the police station without issuing any^prioi notice even though Petitioner is not arrayed as Accused in the FIR NO.105/2024 as arbitrary, iltegal, against to the principles of natural justice and against to the Article 14, 19 and 21 of Constitution of lndia and consequenfly direct the Respondent No.3 to restrain from interfering with the life and liberty of Writ Petitioner without following due process of law and without following 41-A CrPC.

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2024

¶19

¶20

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 Respondent No.3 to RESTRAIN from interfering with the life and liberty of Writ Petitioner without following due process of law or without following 41-A CrPC

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SUJITH JAISWAL

¶22

Coun6el for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: AGP FOR HOME

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4: NONE APPEARED

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

HON,BLE^{SRI JUSTICEC.V' BHASKAR REDDY} WRIT PETI^{TIONNo.7256of 20/24}

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

The^{present writ petition is liled praying this Courtto} declare^{the action of respondentNo 3 in calling the petitionerto} the^{police station without issuingany prior notice even though} he was^{not arrayed as an accusedin Crime No'1O5 of 2O24 ' as} illegal^{and arbitrary and other reliefs''}

¶28

The case^{of the petitioneris that he is not arrayed as an} accused^{in CrimeNo'1O5 of 2024} '^{dated' l2'O3'2O24' whichwas} registered^{for the alleged offences under Sections42O' 406'467} and^{471 of I'P'C'The grievanceof the petitioneris that} respondent^{No'3 is frequently summoning him to the police} station^{and confining him for hourstogetherwithoutfollowing} the^{procedure prescribed underSection41-A of Cr'P'C' and also} Apex Court^{in Arnesh} the^{guidelines issuedby the Hon'ble}

¶29

Kumar^{Vs. State of Blharl '}

¶30

¶31

The- learned^{AssistantGovernment Pleaderfor} Home appearing^{for respondentNos' 1 to 3' on insrtrctions'} would submit that^{the presenceof the petitioner is required as his} Principal^{is involvedin Crime No' 105 ol 2024 ' therefore' he was}

1(2014) 8 scc 273

CVBR, J wp 7256 2024

summoned to the police station and respondent^{No.3 will follow} the due procedure as required in law.

¶37

In view of the above submissions and since the offences alleged in Crime No. 1O5 of 2024 are^punishable below^seven years, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing respondent No.3 to issue a notice under Section 4l-A of Cr.P.C. and also follow the guidelines issued by the Hon'lrle Apex Court in Arnesh Kum,ar's case (1 supra), if the presence of the petitioner is required for the^purpose of investigation in the above crime.

¶38

With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶39

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any,

¶40

shall stand closed.

¶41

SD/-T. JAYASREE ASSISTANT REG/9t'RAR //TRUE COPYII sEcTtoN bFrrcen

¶42

ro,

¶43

, I:EIL"jH Bi;13rtment, Secrerariar, Hyderabad, rhe State of retansana,

¶44

2 The c-omissioner of porice, cyberabad, Hyderabad. Terangana state. 3 The station House officer: p,itic" stril"i',si'jiiarparry, Fathepur,

¶45

4 One CC to Sri SuiitA-Jaiswal, A_d^vocate to Sri SuiitA-Jaiswal, A_d^vocate Sri SuiitA-Jaiswal, A_d^vocate A_d^vocate tOpUCI 5 Two CCs to Gp 16r Home, to Gp 16r Home, Gp 16r Home, 16r Home, Home, High a"ii a"ii i;lli"Hate

¶46

4 One CC to Sri SuiitA-Jaiswal, A_d^vocate to Sri SuiitA-Jaiswal, A_d^vocate Sri SuiitA-Jaiswal, A_d^vocate A_d^vocate tOpUCI 5 Two CCs to Gp 16r Home, to Gp 16r Home, Gp 16r Home, 16r Home, Home, High a"ii a"ii i;lli"Hate or retangana, 61 Hyderabad IOUTI

¶47

.J 6. Two CD Cobies^' tt6

I^I

{

HIGHCOURT CCTODAY

DATED:2010312024

ORDER

WP.No.7256 of 2024

-i':.
(
4'
o.)
(') 2 1 liiii iil{
'.,) -/
!.

¶55

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION

¶56

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶57

o)*o W

Kothakonda Rajendra Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kothakonda Rajendra Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Syed Khaja Ziyauddin Vs The State of Telangana

Surakanti Anupa Reddy Vs The State of Telengana

Ajmeera Poojitha Vs The Station House Officer

Amena Begum Vs The State of Telangana

Dr. Ajmeera Prahlad Vs State of Telangana

S. Shobha Vs The state of Telangana