Dismissed

Mohd Ismail Biyabani @ Fruit Mohammed v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC10 Jun 2025WP/15327/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought protection from arrest and harassment in connection with an FIR and directions to continue investigation without arrest. Counsel sought permission to withdraw the writ petition, which the Court granted, dismissing it as withdrawn with no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw granted; writ petition dismissed as withdrawn, no costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

Mohd Ismail Biyabani @ Fruit Mohammed Vs State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁶¹

¶2

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

¶3

TUESDAY, THE TENTH bNY OT IUruC TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 15327 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mohd lsmail Biyabani @ Fruit Mohammed, S/o Mohd Ziki Ullah, Age 39^years,Occ ; business, R/o. 20-5-434, Shah Ali Banda, Charminar, Hyderabad,^Telangana- 500065.

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 . State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary,^{Home Department,} Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The Station House Officer, Police Station Rein Bazar, Hyderabad.

¶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 of Mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order, or d irection to the respondents, more^particular to Respondent^{no.2 to conlinuethe} investigation by securing the cooperation of the Petitioner,^{without arrestingthe} Petitioner, and further direct the respondents more^{particularlythe respondent} no.2 and its subordinates not to harass the^{petitionersunder the guise of} registration of FIR No. 6312025 (PS Rein Bazar dated 14-04-2025)^{and to not to} interfere with the life and personal liberty of the^{petitioners without followingthe} due process of law, as s(rch their acts are illegal,^{arbitrary,unjust,} unconstitutional, violation of^principles of natural^{justice, and in violativeof Article} 14,21 and 300-A of The Constitution of lndia.

¶15

,-"..4-

¶16

|.A.NO:1 OF 2025

¶17

Petition Under Section 151 CPC praying that in the c rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to pass such directions as the Honourabie Court deem fit, directing the respondents more particularly the respondent no.2 and subordinates to not aflest the petitioner. and not to interfering with life and personal liberty of the petitio rer under the guise of registration of FIR No. 6312025 (PS Rein Bazar dated 14-04-2025) and to follow the principle laid in Siddharth ( Supra).

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI SYED YOUSUF

¶19

Counsel for the Respondents : GP FOR HOME

¶20

The Court made the following ORDER

¶21

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR

¶22

WRIT PETITION No.15327 of 2o25

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission

¶25

of the Court to withdraw this Writ petition.

¶26

Granting permission as sought for, this Writ petition

¶27

is dismissed as withdrau,n. No order as to costs.

¶28

Consequentlv, miscellaneous petitions pending, if

¶29

any, shall stand closed

¶30

SD/-K.BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SE N OFFICER

Two CCs to GP FOR HOIVE, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT] 2. One CC to SRI SYED YOUSUF, Advocate tOpUCl

¶35

Two CD Copies

SA GJP w

HIGH COURT

DATED:10 10612025

'-.. 1HE s --.' '-:. <br>(
_' ,}.
I
I
10 sEP 20r
')

ORDER

WP.No.15327 of 2025

DISMISSING THE W.P

AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS.

¶44

('' i\9i'Y

Mohd Ismail Biyabani @ Fruit Mohammed v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Ismail Biyabani @ Fruit Mohammed v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt K. Manjula Vs The State of Telangana

Gugulothu Sundar, Vs The State of Telangana

K Ashok Naidu Vs The State of Telangana

Kunrapu Ashok Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Dastagir Shareef Vs The State of Telangana

Mandava Upender Vs The State of Telagana