Dismissed¶44

Mohammed Abdul Rasheed v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC10 Nov 2025WP/13594/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition dismissed as infructuous without costs; mandamus sought for completion of investigation and filing of charge sheet in FIR No. 294/2017 dated 21.10.2017 (Secs. 420, 468, 471 IPC) by Inspector of Police PS Musheerabad against Respondents 4 to 8; Article 226 petition; IA No. 1 of 2018 under Section 151 CPC; cause of action no longer survives; Government Pleader raised no objection; miscellaneous petitions closed; Telangana High Court, 10 November 2025, Justice N. Tukaramji; W.P. No. 13594 of 2018.

What did the court decide?

Recording the submissions of both learned counsel (petitioner's counsel: cause of action no longer survives, seeks dismissal as infructuous; Assistant Government Pleader for Home: raises no objection), the Court dismissed the writ petition as infructuous, with no order as to costs. ¶44

Mohammed Abdul Rasheed Vs The State of Telangana — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

13217 |

¶2

)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF^NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{N. TUKARAMJI}

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 13594 OF²⁰¹⁸

¶9

Between:

¶10

Mohammed Abdul Rasheed, S/o.Mohammed^{Abdul Shukoor, a} ged 33 years, Occ. Private service R/o. Flat No.303,^{Moghultvlehran,#11-5-1} 51, Red Hills, Hyderabad, T.S.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Telangana, Rep. by^{its Principal Secretary, HomeDepartment,} Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶14

The Commissioner of Police,^{Basheerbagh,Hyderabad}

¶15

The lnspector of Police, PS Musheerabad,^Hyderabad

¶16

Smt. Safia Zeba, W/o. Mohammed^{Abdul Rasheed Age. 25years,O.cc:.} Housewife, R/o. H.No.20-5-^{17 41 1I 1 1,} Qazipura,^{Shalibanda, Hyderabad}

¶17

Mohd. Yakub Ali, S/o. Not^{KnownAge. 54 years, Occ: Asst. Sub lnspector}

¶18

Smt. Khatija Sultana, D/o. Mohd.^{Yakub Ali, Age: 48years,Occ:Housewife} Nos. 5 & 5 are R/o. H.No.16-4-660/2,^{New Road,Chanchalguda,Hyderabad,} T.S.

¶19

Md. Abdul Raheem @^Azam. S/o.^{NotknownAged:.49years, Occ: Private} Employee, R/o.H.No:16-4-660/'1 ,^{NewRoad, Chanchalguda, Hyderabad}

¶20

Qazi Musheerabad, Qzai^{gally, Badilvlasiid,Musheerrabad, Hyderabad'}

¶21

Respondents 4 to 8 are not necessary^{partiesto thiswrit petition.}

¶22

...RESPONDENTS

¶23

Petition under Article 226 ot the^{constitutionof lndia praying that in the} circumstances statedⁱⁿ the^{affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be} pleased to issue a writ, order or Direction more^{particularlyone in the natureof} Wntf Of MANDAMUS declaring^{that the inaction of the Respondent. No.3in} filing the charge sheet in^{FIR No. 294t2017 dated 21.10.2017 lor the offences} undlr Sec.420, 468, 471^{IPC againstthe Respondents No. 4 to 8 as illegal'} arbitrary and void and consequently^{direct the Respondent No.3 to completethe}

¶24

investigation b1r filing the charge-sheet in FIR No. 29412017^{dated 21.10.2017} against the Res,pondents No. 4 to 8 at the earliestⁱⁿ the^{interestof justice.}

¶25

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶26

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances^stated in the affidavit^''iled in support of the^petition, the High Court^{may be pleased to} direct the Restrlondent No.3 to complete the investigation^{by filing the charge} sheet in FIR Nc,.29412017 dated 21 102017^against the^{RespondentsNo.4 to 8} at the earliest in the interest of^justice.

¶27

Counsel for the, Petitioner: SRI M.A. BASITH

¶28

Counsel for the, Respondent No.1 to 3: SRI D. PRADEEP,^{ASST.GP FOR HOME}

¶29

Counsel for the, Respondent No.4 to 8:^{- -} -^-

¶30

The Court madr: the following: ORDER

¶31

¶32

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUIGRAMJI

¶33

WRIT PETITION No.13594 OF 2018

¶34

ORDER:

¶35

This^rVrit Petition is filed under Anicle 226 of C-onstitution of India seeking the following rehef / s-

¶36

)

¶37

"... to issue/a Writ, Order or Direction more panicuiarly one in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS declaring that the inaction of the Respondent. No.3 in filing the chaqge sheet in FIR No. 294/20L7 dated 21.10.20L7 for the offences under Sec.420, 468, 471 IPC against the Respondenm No. 4 to 8 as illegal, artitnry and void and consequently direct the Respondent No.3 to complete the investigation by filing the charge-sheet in FIR No.294/2017 dated 21.10.20L7 agairst the Respondents No. 4 to 8 at the earliest in the interest of^jtstice, and to pass......"

¶38

Fleard I{r.M.ABasith, learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶39

Mr.D.Pradeep, learned fusistant Government Pleader for Ftrome appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶40

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the cause of action in the present writ petition no longer survives for adudication and, therefore, seels dismissal of the writ petition as infrucruow

¶41