Disposed

Malkhed Jagadesh and another v. The State of Telangana and 5 Others

Telangana HC22 Apr 2025WP/11961/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought a mandamus directing police to register an FIR against private respondents on their complaint. Police stated they made a GD entry, conducted a preliminary enquiry and closed the complaint as civil in nature, informing petitioners via PMS. The High Court held the grievance stood redressed and disposed of the writ with liberty.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of holding grievance redressed, with liberty to seek further remedies under Cr.P.C./BNSS; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

Malkhed Jagadesh and another Vs The State of Telangana… — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2025)

[³¹⁶⁶ ]

1 f, il

t F

i'l' Hil' ,d

I I

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

¶14

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

¶15

PRESENT

¶16

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTIGE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶17

WRIT PETITION NO: 11961 OF 2021

¶18

Between:

¶19

Malkhed Jagadesh and another, S/0. Malkhed Sharanappa Age 70 yrs Occ Business, Rlo 3-2-62, Pathi Bazar, Narayanpet, Narayanpet Dislrict.

¶20

2 Malkhed lVlahesh, S1p. Malkhed lr/alikarjun Age 39 yrs Occ Business, R/o 3-26211 P athi Bazar, Narayanpet, Narayaripet D'lstrict.'

¶21

...PETITIONERS

¶22

AND

¶23

The State of Telangana, Rep by its Principal gecretary, Home Department Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad

¶24

The Superintendent of Police, Narayanpet, Narayanpet District.

¶25

Station House Officer, Police Station Nirayarlpet, Narayanpet District.

¶26

4 Mr -Sanhlapuram Mallesh. S/o S Chinnaiah Ale 3Q yrs Occ Business, R/o 5- 1 -481 1 I A, Pallaburzurg Village, Narayanpet Diqirict

¶27

5 Nelolu Pedda Raju,^g/o lrf S6isnna Age 36 yis OCc Business R/o 5-'l-2611 , Palla[u;2g19, Narayanpet District

¶28

Nelolu Chinna Raju, S/o N. Saiarrna Age 27 yrs Ooc Business R/o 5-1-2611, Pallahurzurg, Narayanpet District

¶29

...RESPONDENTS

¶30

Petition under Article 2?6 of the Constitulion o! lndia praying that^jn the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therglvith, the lligh Qourt may be pleased to issue qn qppropriate Writ more pqrticulqrly gne in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the actign of the respondenls Ng. 3 in not registering the FIR/ case against the respondents No.4 to No. 6, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principals of natural justice, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principals of natural^justice.

¶31

lA NO: 'l OF 2021

¶32

Petitign under Seclion 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

€

t E tr:

l, II d

t. r I

I tff

; r

I F t

i ,

,1 fr ;t ii

the respondents No. 3 to forthwith register FlRi Case against the respondents No 4 to No. 6, pending disposal of the main Writ petition.

¶46

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI THOMAS LLOYD Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 TO 3: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 TO 6: -

¶47

The Cqurt made the following: ORDER

¶48

F I

¶49

, I

¶50

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD^KUMAR

¶51

W.P.No. 1196r of 2021

¶52

OR ER:

¶53

The grievance of the^petitioners in^{the presentWrit Petition is that} basing on the complaint^{made by} the^{petitionerson 08.04.2021,the} respondents-authorities are^{not initiating actionby registering theFIR} against the unofficial respondents^{4 to 6, which actionof the respondents} it is contended as highly illegal^{and arbltrary.}

¶54

None appears for the^{petitioners.Heardthe learned Government} Pleader for Home appearing^{for the official respondents,and perused the} record.

¶55

Having regard to the nature^{of /s involved in the Writ Petitionand} the manner of disposal, this^{Court is of the view that noticeto unofficial} respondents is not necessary^{for adjudication of the present Writ Petition.}

¶56

When the matter is taken^{up for hearing, learned Government} Pleader appearing for the official^{respondentssubmits that the} respondents-authorities on receiving the^{complaint made by the} petitioners, have made a GD entry and after causing^{preliminary enquiry,} closed the said complaint on^{24.04.2021' by noting the same as "civil in} nature"; and that the^{petitioners were alsoinformed of the actiontaken by} sending communication through^{PetitionManagement System(PMS).}

--ttt

II ; f!

r \

,1 H ;l rl

I have taken note of the respective submissions made.

¶64

Having regard to the submission made as above and since, it is now stated before this Court that a communication through PMS has been sent to the petitioners informing them of the action taken on the aforementioned complaint lodged by closing the same as^"civil in nature", this Court is of the view that the grievance of the^petitioners in the present Writ Petition stands redressed. However, if the petitioners are aggrieved by the said action taken by the respondents-authorities, it^is open for them to avail further remedies under Cr.P.C./BNSS.

¶65

Granting liberty as noted hereinabove, the^present Writ Petition is

¶66

disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶67

B. Consequently, miscellaneous^petitions, if any,^pending shall stand

¶68

closed.

¶69

SD/.N. SRIHARI

¶70

<sup>DEPUTY REG ISTRAR

¶71

//TRUE COPY// SiECTION OFFICER

¶72

1. The Principat Secretary, Home Department Sec rrat Buildings, Hyderabad, State of Telangana

¶73

¶74

2.1 The Superintendent of Police, Narayanpet, Narayanpet Statiott Hou_se OJf icer P_olice_Station Naraya npet, Ni rayanpet Distnct.District.

¶75

4( One CC to SRI I HOIMAS LLOYD, Advocate [OPUC] Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court for the State of Tetangana, at Hyderqbad IOUTj 6 Tyvo CD Copies PSK. BS \r.

,I t ,4

I I ) I I

4 I il d

HIGH COURT

)

DATED:2210412025

ORDER

1 qtE S rzr t6,
v^<br>(
: P
a
I ,-.1 17 luN m6
-h':o61qr ^€9

¶92

WP.No.I196'l of 2021

¶93

DISPOSING OF THE^{WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT COSTS

¶94

?e-

¶95

(1),'-\ Jo 5^v</sup>

¶96

5 I

Malkhed Jagadesh and another v. The State of Telangana and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Malkhed Jagadesh and another v. The State of Telangana and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Errabelli Vijay Kumar Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Mary Grace Educational Society Vs The State of Telangana

Mohd Ifteqar Hussain Vs The State of Telangana

Zubeda Tarannum Vs The State of Telangana

V. Sambasiva Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. K. Sowmya Vs The State of Telangana