K.Lalitha, Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

K.Lalitha, Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction that the respondent police authorities shall refrain from interfering with the petitioner's right to life and personal liberty, except in strict accordance with law; writ petition disposed of with the above direction; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of the 2nd respondent in issuing notice dated 19.03.2016 under Sections 91 and 160 CrPC in FIR/Crime No.59 of 2014 (Central Crime Station, Detective Department, Hyderabad), calling the petitioner to the police station and interfering with her personal liberty, is illegal, unjust, arbitrary, unlawful, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India. +1 more

Court's answer

The petitioner's presence was sought only in her capacity as a witness during the course of investigation pursuant to the issuance of the impugned notice.

Ratio / Principle

Having regard to the factual position and stage of proceedings — the investigation having concluded and the Calendar Case pending before the competent court — the petitioner's prayer to declare the impugned notice illegal or without authority has become infructuous.

Key takeaways

As the calendar case proceedings remain pending, it is directed that the respondent police authorities refrain from interfering with the petitioner's right to life and personal liberty, except in strict accordance with law.ratio¶46

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (Special Original Jurisdiction) — Hon'ble Sri Justice N. Tukaramji (single judge); W.P. No. 10471 of 2016 (K. Lalitha v. (1) State of Telangana and (2) Inspector of Police, CCS/DD, Hyderabad), decided 10.10.2025. Filed under Article 226, the petitioner challenged notice dated 19.03.2016 (No.59/Cr/CCS-DD-Hyd/16) issued under Sections 91 and 160 CrPC in FIR/Crime No. 59 of 2014 as illegally calling her to the police station and violating Articles 20 and 21 of the Constitution; I.A. No. 1 of 2016 sought a stay of proceedings including arrest. None appeared for the petitioner. AGP (Home) reported investigation complete, charge sheet filed, and C.C. No. 12782 of 2019 (XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad) pending summons on 11.11.2025; the notice had been issued as petitioner was signatory to revised building plans submitted to GHMC by M/s Sai Krishna Constructions, her presence being sought only as a witness. Holding the prayer infructuous, the Court nonetheless directed respondent police to refrain from interfering with the petitioner's right to life and personal liberty except in strict accordance with law, disposed of the writ petition without costs, and closed pending miscellaneous petitions. No precedents were cited.

13217 |

IN THE HIGH COT'RT FOR THE STATE OF TEI.ANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original J urisdiction)

FRIDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF OCTOAER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

WRIT PETITION NO: 10471 OF 2016

Between:

K.Lalitha, Wo. Srinivas Kumar^{Bhadram,aged about 40 years, Occ; FlousehoH} affairs, Ri/o. Plot No.101, SVC^{Residency, Street No.9,Barkathpura,Hyderabad.}

.....PETITIONER

AND

The State of Telangana, Rep.^{by its Prl. Secretary, Flome Department,}

TelanganaSecretariat,Hyderabad.

The lnspector of Police,^{WCOTeam-'t, 2nd Floor, CentralCrimeStation' DD'} Hyderabad.

.....RESPONDENTS

Petition Under Article 226 ot^{lhe Constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated in^{the affidavitfiled therewith, the High Courtmay be} pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more^{particularlyone in} the nature of Writ of Mandamus^{declaringthe action of the 2nd respondent,in} issuing the notice No.59/CrlCCS-DD-Hyd/16,^{dated 19.03.2016' under Sections 9'l} and 160 of the Code of Criminal^{Procedurein FlRlCrimeNo.59of 2O14on the file} of the Central Crime Station,^{Detective Department, Hyderabad,interferhgwith} the petitioners^personal liberty,^{calling to PoliceStatbn, as illegal, unjust, arbitrary'} unlawful, unconstitutional,^{violative of Articles20,210f the constitution of India,} contrary to the^provision of^{Cr. P.C.}

I.A.NO:1 OF 2016^(WPM P.NO:13184^{OF 2016)}

Petition Under Section 151 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in} the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition, the High Court maybe pleasedto stay}

t' I

allfurtherproceedingspursuanttothenoticeNo.Sg/Cr/C(S-DD-Hyd/16,dated 19.03.2016, under^{sections 91 & 160 of the code of (l iminal Procedurein} FlRl/Crime No.59 0f^{2014 0n the file of the central crir e station, Detective} Department, Hyderabad,^{includingthe anest of the petitione, pendingdisposal of} the writ^petition.

Counsel for the Petitioner^{: SRIS'V.MUN!REDOY(NONE r\ )PEARED)}

Counsel for the Respondents^{: SRI M.SRINIVAS' AGPFOfl HOME}

The Court made the^{following ORDER}

I

(-
a

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTTCE N.TUKARAMJI WRIT PETITION No.10471 OF 2016

9RDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Arlicle 226 of Constitution of lndia

seeking the following reliet

'...fo ,'ssue an appropiate Wit, Order or direction more pa iculady one in the nature of 'Wit of Mandamus' dxlaing the action of the 2d respondent, in issuing the notbe No.59/Cr/CCSDD-Hyd/16, clatetl 19.03.2016, under Sections 91 and 1ffi of the Cde ot Criminal Prrcedure in FIR/Cime No.59 of 2014 on the file of the Central Cime Station, Detective Depaftment, Hy&nbad, inteieing with the petitioners perfinal libetty, calling to Polbe Station, as illegal, unjust, afuitraty, unlawfut, un@nstitutional, violative of Articles 20. 21 of the Constitution of ldia, antnry to the provision of Cr. P.C.-."

None appeared for the petitioner.

Heard Mr. M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for

Home appearing br respondent Nos.1 and 2.

Leamed Assistant Govemment Pleader for Home submits that Crime No. 59 of 2014 was duly investigated and, upon completion of investigation and filing of the charge sheet, C.C. No. 12782 of 2019 was registered on the file of the learned Xll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. The case is presently listed for sumrnons on 11 .11 .2025. lt is further submitted that during the course of

2

I{'r iJ w I f,o.1o471 of²⁽⁾¹⁶

investigation, a notice dated^{19.03.2016wasserved} ':^{r the petitioner} under Sections^{91 and'l6Oof the Code of CriminalPro: rdure, 1973, as} she was the signatory^{to the reMsedbuildingplans r; rbmittedto the} Greater Hyderabad^{Municipal Corporation (for short''( HMC') by M/s'} Sai Krishna Construc'tions,^{and herpresencewas n quired for the} purposes of investigation. lt is contended^{that the r(!! pondentpolice} authorities have not' at any^{point, interfered with the pt:r tionels rightto} life or^personal liberty, and that^{since the investigationtrr s culminatedin} the filing of the charge^{sheet and the registration of the )alendarCase,} the relief sought by the^{petitioner has become infructur:rs Accordingly,} the learned Assistant^{Govemment Pleader pra'/ for passing} appropriate orders.

I have perused the material^{placed on record}

As submitted by the leamed^{Assistant Govemtr} -'nt^{Pleader for} Home, the^{petitione/spresencewas sought only in l'( r capacity as a} witness during the course of^{investigation,pursuant k) lhe issuance of} the impugned notice.

Having regard to the factual^{position ancl the stageof} proceedings, particularly since the investigation has^{reen concluded} and the Calendar Case is now^{pending beforethe conl )etentcourtrthe} prayer of the petitioner to declare the impugned^{nct le as illegal or}

3

rTn,^J g.P.t(o.1O4"r^{of 2016}

!t

I I I I I

l I

I I

without^{authorityhas beconeinfrucluous' Horrvever'as the calendar} case^{proceedings are still pending' it is directedthat the respondent} police authorit'res^{shallrefrainfrom interferingwith the petitioner's right} to life^{andpersonalliberty' except in strict accordance with law'}

Wrth the^{above direc{ion' this writ petitionis disposed of' There} shall^{be no order as to costs'}

Miscellaneous^{Petitions' pendingif any' shall stand clnsed}

ITTRUE^COPY/,

Assssr{lT &G'ffiAt SEC16N^OFFICER

"liH:nsljji,fftr#;H'::i:'"":'#":::il:':T:;:::l reransana^a'i

i ffi"ffi,qi1i,,.il,l:[;J:l':T"':JJl;'""'r SA,MP

,l

i

HIGH COURT

DATED:1011012025

ORDER

WP.No.10471 ot^2O16

,1 iE Sir\ tr.'
t
g ftB 20?'6
c.r
i'I
.,
I -oEJo,:::: ;...'

DISPOSING OF^{THE W.P}

WITHOUT COSTS.

KS 2ltlrpatl