Petitioner alleged police harassment and coercion to withdraw his complaint against respondent No.6. Court noted a crime was registered against him and notice under Section 35(3) BNSS was issued; directed investigation strictly per law without interfering with his liberty.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[31661
_l
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 15871 OF 2025
Between:
A Rajinikanth, S/o. Dasharathan, Aged about 35 Years, Occ- I/anaqer, Manapp_uram Gold Loans (Finance Company) Rl/o. Tirumala Nagar, R6ad No.13, Sagar Complex, Near B.N.Reddy, LB.Nagar, Hyderabad.
...PETIT|ONER
AND
...RESPONDENTS
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 an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.5 in interfering into the peaceful life and liberty of the Petitioner and also interfering into civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent No.6 and calling the Petitioner to the-Police Station and threatening to handover the Gold Ornaments to the Respondent No.5 by cotluding with the Respondent No.6 is illegal, arbitrary, u nconstitutional and violation of Articles 14, 15,21 and 300-4 of Constitution of lndia and also violation of Principles of Natural Justice and consequently direct the Respondent No.S not to interfere into peaceful life and liberty and not to interfere into day{o day duties of the Petitioner and not to interfere into the civil disputes between the Petitioner and Respondent No.6 and
I
notthreatenthe Petitioner to handoverthe goldornamentsto the Respondent No.6
lA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition underSection'l 5'1 CPC prayingthat in the circumstancesstated in the affidavit filedin supportof the petition,the High Court maybe pleasedto direct the RespondentNo.5 not to interfere into peaceful life andlibertyand not to interfere into day{oday duties of the Petitioner and not to interfere into the civil disputes betwc'enthe Petitionerand Respondent No.6 andnot threatenthe Petitioner to handoverthe goldornamentsto the RespondentNo.6pending disposal of the WrilPetition.
Counsel for the Petitioner:SRI RAPOLUBHASKAR Counsel for the RespondentNos.1 TO 5: GP FOR HOME Counsel for the ResPondentNo.6: -
The Court made thefollowing:ORDER
HON'BLE SRIJUSTICB T. VTNOD KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.15871 of 2025
ORDER
Heard leamed counsel for the petitioner and leamed (iovcmrnent Pleader tbr Home appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. I to 5, and perused the record. With the consent ol the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, the Writ Petition is taken up fbr hearing and disposal at admission stage.
\i
2
6'h respondent having approached the 5'l' respondent and lodging
.---_-------
3
complaint against thepetitioner, admittedly,acasevide Cr.No.3 l8l2)24 isregistered against the petitioner herein' The respondent authorities onregisteringthe above crime againstthe petitioner, having issuednotice under Section 35(3)ofBNSS directing the pctitioner toappearbeforethe 5th respondent authorityon 03 -02-2025, and since,petitionerclaimsof he having appearedbefore the said authority onthe datementionedin the notice and also having submitted his explanationthereto, this Court is of the view that the respondent authoritiesare to be directed to take further action while investigating intothe aforesaidcrime strictly in accordance with law and shall not interferewith the life and liberty of the petitioner, otherwise than byfollowingdue process of law.
() Subject to above observationand direction, the Writ Petitionis d isposcd of. No costs
stand c losed.
SD/.P. PONNAKRISHNA STANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//
\
To
SECTION OFFICER
PSK. G-IP q)
HIGH COUR'T
DATED:1210612025
ORDER
WP.No.15871 of 2025
lLtE ST4 /'
\r (r
a
20 JUN 20[ l
.t/
,i^.., ,... -.., i:- ,//
DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETTTION WITHOUT COSTS
5;cori8
*:-
6\6'/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the police were interfering with the petitioner's life and liberty and coercing him in connection with a civil dispute with respondent No.6.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
A Rajinikanth
The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department
The Director General of Police, Telangana
The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad Police Commissionerate
The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Gandhinagar Circle
Madala Raju
T.Vinod Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
