Disposed¶32

Rajender Prasad Agarwal v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC9 Apr 2025WP/10069/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

FIR non-registration; writ of Mandamus under Article 226; Articles 14, 19, 21 of the Constitution; Code of Criminal Procedure; Hyderabad police; Gandhi Nagar Police Station; Cyber Crime Police Station, Basheerbag; online complaint dated 16-01-2024; written complaint dated 27-01-2024; disposed in terms of common order in batch of Writ Petitions dated 10.03.2025; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed of in terms of the common order dated 10.03.2025; no order as to costs. ¶32

Rajender Prasad Agarwal Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁶ I

¶2

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

¶3

WEDNESDAY,THE NINTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 10069 OF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

Rajendsr ?la:a^d Ag{wal, .S/o Dwarka prasand Agarual aged about 60 years, R/o 504, Surya Pearl Apartment, Gandhi trtagar,-Hyderabid_ 5OO0SO

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State 9l f.plqnsqla, Rep by Principat Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat building, Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad District, Hyderabad 3 The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Gandhinagar, Hyderabad. 4 The Station House Officer, Gandhi Nagar police Station, Gandhi Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶13

5 The Station House Officer, Cyber Cirme Police Station, Basheerbag, Hyderabad.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pteased to issue a writ, order, or direction, more particularly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus by declaring the inaction of the respondent No. 1 to 5 in pursuant to the online complaint dated 16- 01- 2024 before Respondent No. 5 and the written complaint daled 27- 01- 2024 and not registering the FIR as completely i egal arbitrary unconstitutional and violative of article 14, 19,21 of constitution of lndia read with statutory provisions of code of criminal procedure in the interest of justice

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. HIMANGINI SANGHI

¶17

Counsel forthe Respondents: GP FOR HOME

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

; . i i i

TI{E II(}N'BLE SRI^{JUSTICE T. VINOD I1:'UMAR}

¶24

W.P.No. 10o,69 of²⁰²⁴

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Thc^g1.-r," : r:cc^{of the petitionerin the presenlWrit ?:tition is} that the^{re s1)o l: :nts-authorities, basingon the ccmlrlairts madc} by the^{petL'-i,rl (: on 16.O1.2O24(online)and27 '(t12)2'Ir'r'rrtten),} arc not initiar-irril^{action by registeringLheFIR agai'rstLht:r rnofficial} respondenl(s', 'r'tich^{action of the respondcnts autlr:rriries itis} contended^{a,', 1i I} lrlf^{illegal and arbitrary.}

¶27

Ilear:l l ::'-nccl Counsel^{for lhepeLitiorl:r, thr: lcarncd} GovernmelLl Pitr^{dr:r lor Homc appearing for the oliicialr''lr;pondent} Nos.1 to 5 i'.n I 'vith^{the consent of the learned couns;ela ppearing} for the respec:ir,^{parties, the writ petition is takcn ul1'r' hcaring} and dispos al a^t .dmission^stage.

¶28

Lear:Lr-cl i ounscl appearing^{onbehalf olpt Lit c ncr and} learned G,).r)I^{.lncnL Pleader for Homeappearinqfo L' tL e official} respondents s rt,mit lhat the^{issue involved in th r W'': Fr:lition is} squarell. c )',r1 1:^b1' a^{decisionof this Courl in WP No 7 1 ) ) of 2025} & batch, dt. l[)^{r)i],2025, and lhe said common ord.rr tr:r-llc applyin} all force to [he ]i.cts of the^presentcase.

¶29