Disposed

Shaheda Begum v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Apr 2025WP/10186/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the writ petition challenging police visit, photography, and threat of implicating family members in false cases regarding the petitioner's younger son accused in four crimes.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to interfere with the petitioner and her family members unless the complicity of the petitioner is established.

Shaheda Begum Vs The State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

t³¹⁶⁶ J

¶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: 10186 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Shaheda Beg um, W/o. lVlohd Osman Khan, Age. 41 years Occ Household Rt/o. H.No.2-4-666/1 , Sunder Nagar, Kachiguda Himayath Nagar. Hyderabad. Telangana

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State o{ Telangana, Ttllough Home Department. Rep. by its principal Secretary, Secretariat Buildings. Hyderabaci. Telangana

¶12

2 The Station House Officer, Malkajgiri Central Crime Station (CCS) Malkajgiri Hyderabad. Telangana.

¶13

3 The Station House Officer, Jawahar Nagar Police Station Secunderabad

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Petition under Article 226 oI the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue are appropriate Writ or any other order or direction particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of 2nd Respondent in visiting the house of Petitioner and taking her photographs and the action of 3.d Respondent officers in calling the petitioner's family members to 3d Respondent Police Station and threatened to implicated in false case as arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶17

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

¶18

-r;f*7

¶19

the 3rd respondent not to interfere with the day to day life of the petitioner and her family members, pending disposal of the writ petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI SYED ALEEMUDDIN SUBHAN

¶21

Counsel forthe Respondents: GP FOR HOME

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

iE-q. i."t

¶24

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD^KUMAR

¶25

trI.P.No. LOL86 of 2o25

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for the.official respondent Nos. I Lo 3, and with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and disposal at admission stage.

¶28

Shorn of unnecessary details, the case of the^{petitioner,in} brief, is that the 3"r respondent is calling the^{petitionerand her} family members to thc polices station on the^pretext ol their younger son, namely Afroz Khan, having criminal antecedents, even tl-rough they are not involved in any crime, thereby^interfering n ith their personal tife and liberty, which action of the respondents-authorities it is contended as highly illegal, arbitrary and in violation of Arlicle 21 of the Constitution of India.

¶29

Petitioner lurlher contends that the officials of the 3'd respondent had visited their house and took the photographs of the petitioner as well as her elder son and threatened them that in the event of the petitioner not disclosing the whereabouts of their younger son, they would be implicated in false cases.

¶30

¶31

-)'{

¶32

Per contra, learned Government Pleader for Honre appearing on behalf of the responden ts-authoritie s u,ould submit that the petitioner's younger son, Mr.Afroz KLran, is involved in four criminal cascs; that in all four cases registerecl againsL him, he is the main accused and is zrbsconding; and lhat the authorities in order to find out his whereabouts, have visited the petitioner's house and also work place of petitioner's husband to gather information relating to the petitioner's younger son.

¶33

Learned Government Pleader would further submit that except causing invcstigation into the crimcs registercd against Mr.Afroz Khan, the're sponden ts-authonties arc not interfering u,ith the life and liberty of the petitior-rer or her familv members.

¶34

I have taken note of thc respective submissions rnade.

¶35

Admittedly, Lhe petitioner, by her own admission, admit to the fact of her younger son, namely Mr. Afroz Khan, having criminal antecedents and is being involved in lour cases/crimes, which are beir-rg investigated rnto b1.the re spondents-a uthorities.

¶36

Since, it is also stated to this Court by the learned Government Pleader that in all the four crimes regisrcred against the petitioner's younger son, neither the petitroner nor her husband are involved or arrayed as accused as of date, this Court

¶37

¶38

is of the view [hat the respondents-authorities are to be directed to conduct investigat.ion into the aforesaid crimes registered against the younger son of the petitioner, and shall not interfere with the personal life and liberty of the petitioner, unless the complicity of thc petitioner is established, in^q,hich case the respondents shall take further action strictly in accordance with law.

¶39

Subject to the above observation and direction, the Writ Pctition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶40

1O. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall

stand closed

//TRUE^COPY'/

.,i"Jit?EtJflXA i

SECNON^{OFFIC ER}

rough^Home

To, The^{State of} Telang^ana, 1. The PrincipaI Secretary' s.^Hyd erabad^{Telang ana} Secretariat^Building

¶47

Dep artment er, Malka^{jgiri Central Crime Statron (CCS) Malkajgtn}

¶48

, TheHvd^erabad, Station^{House TelangOfficana} har^{Nagar PoliceStation Secunderabad} 34 TheOne^StCation Cto^{Sri HouseS} ye^offi dAleemuddincer,^Jawa Subha^{n, Advocate[OPUCI} 5 Two^CC sto^GP forHo me,^{HighCourtfor theStateof Telangana, at} Hyderab^{ad [oUTl}

¶49

1. Two^{CD CoPies}

¶50

TJLS^\q-

\ t\

HIGH COURT

DATED:0410412025

ORDER

WP.No.10186 of 20Zs

$ IHE S I^{ 14.
t ()
:,':J $('
|,.).r 02 y,AY 2tr6
o2
i
.+
*
.Sry.y6rr(:C

¶57

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

¶58

qcCeJ> &"

Shaheda Begum v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaheda Begum 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammed Abdul Ayesha Sulthana, Vs The State of Telangana

Pendurthi Veerraju Vs The State of Telangana

M/s. Kyr Constructions Vs The State of Telangana

Sandaveni Srinivas, Vs The State of Telangana

D. Vijaya Vs The State of Telangana

Jaspreet Singh Sahni Vs The State of Telangana