Dismissed

Md. Yaseen v. The State of Telangana rep by the Principal Secretary

Telangana HC10 Sept 2025WP/18546/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging police summons to produce notebooks. Ruling that grievance no longer survives due to pending criminal trial, the court directed police to refrain from interfering with the petitioner's liberty save in strict accordance with law during proceedings and dismissed the petition without costs.

What did the court decide?

Direction to police to refrain from interfering with petitioner's liberty save in strict accordance with law during pending criminal trial; petition dismissed.

Md. Yaseen Vs The State of Telangana rep by the… — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

a32171

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATEOF TELATIGANA} AT HYDERABAD (SPeciat Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE^{TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER} TWOTHOUSAND^{AND TWENWFIVE}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI}

¶6

Md. Yaseen, S/o:^{Md' Akbar} Khan, about 24^{years,occ:Student} R/o H.No.¹ 7-8-373,^YakutPura'

¶7

¶8

TheStateofT rep by the Principal^{Secretary,, HomeDepartment'} Secretariat,

¶9

The Commissioner^{of Police Cyberabad,Hyderabad"}

¶10

The Station^{House officer, Narsingi Police Station,, Cyberabad, Hyderabad.}

¶11

...RESPONDENTS

¶12

Petition under^{Article226 of lhe constitution of lndia praying that in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavitfiledtherewith,the High courtmay be} pleased to issue a writ, order or^{direction more particularlyone in the natureof} Writ of Mandamus declaring^{the actionof the 3'd respondent policein callingthe} petitioner to the police station and^{insisting him to produceNote Bookspertaining} to the^{petitioners B.Tech courseas illegal, arbitraryand violativeof Article 21 of} the Constitution of^{lndia and consequently direct the 3rd respondent not to call the} petitioner to the Police station and^{insist to produceNote Books pertainingto the} petitioners B.Tech Course.

¶13

3 o u 17

¶14

Petition under section 151 CPC^{praying that in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition, the High Courtmaybe pleasedto direct} the 3rd respondent not to^{call the petitioner to the Police Stationand insistto}

¶15

produce Note Bc,oks^pertaining to the^{petitioner'sB.fech Course, pending} disposal of the^wril: Petition.

¶16

Counsel for the^{Petitioner: SRI A. RAVI SHANKAR(NONE APPEAED)}

¶17

Counsel for the Respondents:^{SRI R. LAXMIKANTHREDDY,AGPFOR HOME}

¶18

The Court made lhe^{following:ORDER}

\ \

I l i I II I

THE HONOURABLE SRI JI'STICE N

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226^{of Constitutionof}

¶26

India seeking the following relief:

¶27

"...to issue a utrit,^order or^{direction ttore paftianLartu one in tle} nature of Writ of Mand.amus declaing the^{action of tle3d} respondent potice in mlling the^{petitionerto tlrc potice sta,tbn and} insistinq him to^produe Note^Boolcs WrtaintW^{to the petitioners} B.TechCourse as ittegat, arbitrary and^{uiolatiue of Articte 21 of} the Constidltion of India and consequentl!.1^{directthe 3'd respondent} not to catl th.e^petitioner to t?rc Polie^{Station and insbt to produce} Note Boolcs^pertaintna to the^{petitioners B.Tech Course and. pass} such other order or orders as fhis Hon'ble^{Court mag deemftt and} proper in the cirqtmstanes of the @se.....'

¶28

None appeard for the petitioner.

¶29

Heard Mr.R.La:rmikanth Reddy, learned^{Assistant Government} Pleader for Home appearing for respondent^{Nos.1 to 3-}

¶30

The learned Assistant Government^{Pleader submitted that} during the course of enquiry in Crime^{No. 626 of 2O15, the} respondent police authorities secured^{the presence of the petitioner} and obtained prod.uction of certain^{notebooks,8s they were} considered relevant material for tlre^{purpose of investigation.} However, during the pendency of the^{present writ petition,the} investigation was completed, and a^{charge sheet was filed,} whereupon C.C. No. 144 of^IZOZZ was^{registered. on the frle of the} XIII Additional Judicial Magistrate of^{First Class,Rajendranagar-}

¶31

¶32

The matter is, presenfly pending trial. In view theieof, the grievance of the petitioner no longer survives, and dismissal of ttre petition

¶33

has been sought.

¶34

I have <:arefully perused the material placed on record.

¶35

Having regard to the submissions of the learned Assistant Government Pleader, the pendency of criminal proceedings agoinst the petitioner, and the recognized limitations on the powers of tJre police while seeking the presence of an accused during investigation or criminal lroceedings, it is directed that the respondents/police authorities shall refrain from interferinC with the life and personal liberty of thr: petitioner, save and except in strict accordance with law.

¶36

With this direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶37

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶38

SO'- AH^{iTED ABDULLA KHAN} G

¶39

,,TRUE^COPYJ/ SECTION OFFICER

¶40

To,

¶41

The Principal^{Secretary,, Home Department, Secretariat,TheState of} Telangana^HYderabad.

¶42

The Commissioner^{of Police Cyberabad, Hyderabad}

¶43

The Stati,)n^{House Officer, Narsingi Police Station,, Cyberabad, Hyderabad'}

¶44

¶45

One CC to Sri A. Ravi Shankar, Advocate [OPUC]

¶46

Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

I"''- r*

HIGH COUFIT

DATED:10/09/2025

t \

ORDER

WP.No.18546 of 2017

(
c
(J ?3 JIl{M
)
*
).

¶55

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

Md. Yaseen v. The State of Telangana rep by the Principal Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Yaseen v. The State of Telangana rep by the Principal Secretary

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

Rafath and 3 Others, Vs Prl.Secy., Home Dept., Hyd., and 4 Others

Mr.Shaik Zafar, Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Malyala Mallavva Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Ahmedi Begum, Vs The State of Telangana, Home Department

Kura Narender Reddy Vs The State of Telangana rep

New Arabian Sheesha Lounge Vs The State of Telangana