Disposed

Mohd Fareeduddin Imtiaz v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC15 Apr 2025WP/11115/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the implication of the petitioner in criminal proceedings by mentioning his name in a Remand Case Diary under the Telangana Protection of Depositors Act and BNS. The High Court, without going into merits and keeping investigation prerogatives open, disposed of the petition directing issuance of notice and cooperation with investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to appear and cooperate with investigation under Section 35(3) of BNSS 2023; Writ Petition disposed without costs.

Mohd Fareeduddin Imtiaz Vs The State of Telangana — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

13217 l

¶2

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

¶3

TUESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 11115 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mohd Fareeduddin lmtiaz, S/o. Mohd Khaja Moinuddin lqbal Aged 44 years, Occ. Business, Ri/o. H.No. 61012813lA, Taj Complex, Pillar No 258, Quadri Hills, Shivrampally, Rajendranagar, K V Ranga Reddy, Hyderabad - 500052.

¶9

AND

¶10

...PET|T|ONER

¶11

The State of Telangana, Through Station House Officer, FOW Team, Vlll CCS DD, Hyderabad

¶12

Dr. Revanth Jaiswal, S/o. Dr. Surya Prakash Jaiswal, Age.42 years, Occ. Doctor, Rl/o. H.No.14-4-3'19, Sadbhavana Heights, Begum Bazaar, Hyderabad - 500 012.

¶13

...RESPONDENTS

¶14

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, order or direction, specifically in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, a. Declaring the action of Respondent No.1 in implicating the Petitioner in Crime No. 21 of 2025, pending before Xll Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, by mentioning his name in the Remand Case Diary by invoking draconic provisions of the Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999 (TSPDFEA) r/w the provisions of BNS, thereby interfering with my life and liberty, as being bad, arbitrary and illegal and in violation of Articles 14, 19,21 of the Constitution of lndia, and b. Consequentially quash the proceedings in Crime No. 21 of 2025, pending before Xll Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad wherein'the Respondents have included the name of the Petitioner in the Remand Case Diary.

¶15

IANO:1O F 2025

¶16

Petition under ljection 151 CpC praying that in the circur.,rn"". stated in the affidavit fired in support of the petition, the High court may be preased to grant stay of all further prcceedings against the petitioner in crime. No. 21 of 2o2s, pending before Xrr Addr. chief Metroporitan Magistrate at Nampaily, Hyderabad, including arrest of the petitioner, pending disposar of the abo.ve writ petition,

¶17

Counsel for the^petitioner: SRI R.ANURAG Counsel forthe Respondent No.1: SRI MAHESH RAJE, Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.2: __

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶20

WRIT PETITION No. 11115 OF 2025

¶21

ORDER

¶22

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

¶23

lndia, seeking the following relief

¶24

"...to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, specifically in the nature of "WRIT OF MANDAMUS",

¶25

a. declaring the action of Respondent No.1 in implicating the^petitioner in Crime No.21 of 2075, pending before XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, by mentioning his name in the Remand Case Diary by invoking draconic provisions oF the Telangana Protection of Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999^(TSPDFEA) r/w the provisions of BNS, thereby interfering with my life and liberty, as being. bad, arbitrary and illegal and in violation of Articles 14, 79, 21of the Constitution of India, and

¶26

b. Consequently quash the proceedings in Crime No.21 of 2025,^pending before XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, wherein the respondents have included the name of the^petitioner in the Remand Case Diary and

¶27

c.^pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

¶28

I have heard Mr.R.Anurag, learned counsel for the^petitioner and Mr.Mahesh Raje, learned Government Pleader for Home, representing the respondent No.1

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though the petitioner is not shown as accused, the respondent No.'l authorities are trying to implicate him as an accused in Crime No.21 of 2025 of Central Crime Station, Hyderabad District, registered for the offences^punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023^(for

\lR,

ll:'.1'.|'.0. I I I I i of 202i

¶34

short^'BNS, 2023') and Section 5 of the^{Telangana Protection of} Depositors of Financial Establishments Act, 1999,^{upon the alleged} confessional statement of the^{accused No.'l that he has shared the profits} from the investments with the^petitioner. The^{respondentNo.1 authofities} have started interfering with the life and liberty of the^{petitioner by calling} him to the Police Station and making effort to obtain^{signatures from him} on various books and blank^papers. He^{further subnrits that, in fact the} petitioner is also a victim as he parted amounts to the accused No.'l^. Howsoever, as the^petitioner is apprehending coercive^{measuresand as} he is ready to cr:operate with the investigation,^prayed for^necessary directions for issuance of notice as^per law.

¶35

Learned Government Pleader for Home would submit that the name of the^petitioner came to light on the voluntary statement of the accused No.1 and the investigation is in^{progresshowever,} as the petitioner is willing to see through the process, prayed for necessary orders.

¶36

I have perused the materials on record.

¶37

Having considered the fact that the^petitioner is not an accused as on the date, indeed he also^parted some amount to the^{accusedNo.1 and} as he is proposed to engage in the^process, without^{going into merits} of the matter and keeping open all prerogatives of ther investigation,^the petitioner is directed to appear before the Station House Officer, Central Qrime Station, l{yderabad District, on^{25.04.2025, whereupon,the}

¶38

)

¶39

NIITJ

¶40

lV.P.\o.11115 aJ-2025

¶41

lnvestigating Officer concerned is directed to issue notice under Section 35 (3) of BNSS, 2023, in Crime No.21 of 2025 against the petitioner and

¶42

conduct proceedings as per the guidelines of Arnesh Kumar v. State of

¶43

Biharl - ln unison, the petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation.