Disposed¶41

Sandaveni Srinivas, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Apr 2025WP/10115/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition under Article 226, Telangana High Court, 2025; police interference in civil money transaction; threat of implication as accused in FIR Crime No.9B of 2025 (dt.20.03.2025), Kodad town police station, Suryapet; petitioner arrayed as accused No.5 during investigation; Articles 19, 21, 300A; direction to police to investigate and act strictly in accordance with law; disposal at admission stage without notice to unofficial respondents; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of at the admission stage, subject to the direction to the respondents-authorities to conduct investigation into Crime No.9B of 2025 and take action strictly in accordance with law; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. ¶41

Sandaveni Srinivas, Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶41

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the respondents-authorities (police) in interfering with the personal life and liberty of the petitioner and threatening to implicate him in the FIR registered against respondent No.4 is illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 19, 21 and 300A of the Constitution of India. +1 more

¶29

Ratio / Principle

Having regard to the disposal of the writ petition at the admission stage and the nature of the issues involved, notice to unofficial respondent Nos.4 and 5 is not necessary for adjudication of the present writ petition.

¶28

Key takeaways

Though the petitioner claimed non-involvement in the crime registered against the 4th respondent, since it is revealed that the petitioner has been arrayed as one of the accused (accused No.5) in that crime, his claim does not preclude the authorities from investigating the matter.ratio¶37
The respondents-authorities are directed to conduct investigation into the aforesaid crime (Crime No.9B of 2025) registered on the file of the 3rd respondent authority and to take action strictly in accordance with law.ratio¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Telangana High Court (T. Vinod Kumar, J.), Writ Petition No. 10115 of 2025, decided 04-04-2025: The petitioner, alleging that the police respondents were interfering with his personal life and liberty over a purely civil money transaction between him and respondent No.4, and threatening to implicate him as an accused in FIR Crime No.9B of 2025 (registered on the complaint of respondent No.5 against respondent No.4) unless he paid the demanded amount, sought mandamus invoking Articles 19, 21 and 300A. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submitted that during investigation the petitioner had been arrayed as accused No.5 in the said crime and that the petition was intended to stall further investigation. Holding that notice to unofficial respondents Nos.4 and 5 was unnecessary, and noting the petitioner's arraignment as accused No.5, the Court disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage, directing the respondents-authorities to conduct investigation into the crime and take action strictly in accordance with law. No order as to costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

¶1

[³¹⁶⁶ ]

¶2

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

¶3

FRIDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 10115 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Sandaveni Srinivas, S/o. Sandaveni Gattaiah, Age. 48^years, Occ. Pl,t^job, No.4-2511, Gollapalli mandal, Gollapalli, Karim nagar, Telangana.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary to Home Department, TS Secretariate, Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The Suprintendent of Police, suryapet dist.

¶13

l) The Station House Officer, Kodad town, Suryapet,Telangana.

¶14

4 Dasari.Jayasurya, S/o. venkulu, R/o. Komurambanda village, Kodad^(m), S u rya pet,Tela nga na. Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶15

5 Mani Maharshi perika, S/o. yadagiri, Age . 30^years, Occ. not known to the petitioner. Rl/o.4-180/c/ 14, Muslim bazar yerrakunta bazaar, Kodad, Kodad (m), Suryapet,Telangana. Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶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 order or direction it is hereby prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be^pleased to issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction declaring the action of the Respondent No.3 in interfering with the^personal life and liberty of Petitioner In respect of money transaction in between the Respondent no.4 and the petitioner, the respondent no.3 to interfere in a money transaction between the petitioner and the respondent No-4 which is purely in civil nature, on the influence of the Respondent 4 & 5 that the respondent No-3 making the criminal case settlement with the barrowed money of the^petitioner, if the^petitioner failed to^pay the demanded amount the respondent No-3 threatening the^{petitioner,that they} will included his name as accused in the FIR which is registered by the respondent No-5 against on the respondent No-4 at the respondent No-3^police station,^which is illegal and contrary to law and infringement of Fundamental Rights of^the Petitioners as^guaranteed under Article 19,21 & 300-A of the Constitution^{of lndia}

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶19

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 Respondent No.3 in interfering with the personal life and liberty of Petitioner ln respect of money transaction in between the Respondent no.4 and the petitioner, as the petitioner as no where related to the money and other issues in between the respondent no.4 and the respondent no.5 who is who is alleged as the victim of respondent no.4 influencing the respondent no.3 to interfere in a money transaction which is purely in civil nature, on the influence of the Respondent no.4 & 5 that the respondent No-3 making the criminal iase setflement with the barrowed money of the petitioner, if the petitioner failed to pay the demanded amount the respondent No-3 threatening the petitioner, that they will included his name as accused in the FIR which is registered by the respondent No-S against on the respondent No-4 at the respondent No-3 police station, which is illegal, pending disposal of the above writ petition

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. PAGILLA JAYANTHI

¶21

C6unsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: SRI c.ANIKETH REDDy AGp FOR HOME

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4&5: --

¶23

The Court at the stage of admission made the following: ORDER

¶24

THE HON'BLE SRI ]USTICE T. VINOD^KUMAR

¶25

Writ Petition No. 10115 of 2O25

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the^petitioner, Sri G.Aniketh Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3, and with the consent ofthe learned counsel appearing^{for the} parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at the admission stage.

¶28

Having regard to the manner of disposal of the Writ Petition at the admission stage and the nature of /s involved, this Court^is of^theview that notice to unofficial respondent Nos.4 and 5 is not necessary^for adjudication of the^present Writ Petition.

¶29

Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the^petitioner, in brief,^is that the respondents-authorities are interfering with the^{personallife and} liberty of the petitioner and threatening him that he would be implicatedⁱⁿ the FIR registered against the 4th respondent herein, if the^{petitionerdoes} not^pay the money due to the 4h respondent to the 5th respondent.

¶30

Petitioner fufther contends that the^petitioner is no way connected with the crime registered against the 4th respondent, vide Crime No.9B of 2025 dt.20.03.2025, which has been registered based on the complaint made by the 5th respondent herein and thus, the action of the

¶31

¶32

¶33

respondents in interfering with the personal life and liberty of the petitioner is highly illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 19,21 and 300-4 of the Constitution of India.

¶34

Per contra, learned Assistant Government pleader for Home appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.I to 3 submits that on the respondents-authorities registering a case, vide Crime No.9B of 2025 dt.20.03.2025 against the 4th respondent herein, during the course of investigation, found,the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the aforesaid crime and accordingly, the petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.5 therein.

¶35

Learned Government Pleader would further submit that since the petitioner has been arrayed as accused No.5 in the aforesaid crime, the petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition claiming that he is not involved in the aforesaid crime only to prevent the authorities from investigating into further in the matter.

¶36

The aforesaid submission made by the learned Government pleader for Home is taken on record.

¶37

B. Having regard to the submissions made as above, though the petitioner had claimed of his non-involvement in the commission of crime by the 4th respondent, since, it is revealed that the petitioner having been arrayed as one of the accused i.e. accused No.5 in the aforesaid crime,

¶38

¶39

iq{F-d+!7 ::cF?-$.fr /

¶40

registered on the file of the 3'd respondent authority, this Court is of the view that the respondents-authorities are to be directed to conduct investigation into the aforesaid crime and take action strictly in accordance with law.

¶41