Disposed

Cheela Maruthi v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC24 Jul 2025WP/21490/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner alleged the SHO, Kamareddy was summoning him without any FIR to force settlement of a civil bus sale transaction with a private respondent. The State stated Crime No.356 of 2025 under Sections 420, 409 and 506 IPC had been registered against the petitioner and his daughter, who would be served notices under Section 41-A Cr.P.C./35(3) BNSS.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to receive Section 41-A Cr.P.C./35(3) BNSS notices, furnish documents and cooperate; police to investigate Crime No.356 of 2025 strictly in accordance with law.

Cheela Maruthi Vs State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[³¹⁶⁶ ]

¶2

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

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWENW FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO: 21490 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Cheela Maruthi, S/o Cheela Jagadeeshwar, aged about^{66 years, Occ;Business,} Rl/o H.No.1-5-443, Ramreddy Road, Kamareddy Town and^District.

¶9

.....PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

'1 . State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad.

¶12

The Director General of Police, Government^{of Telangana, Hyderabad.}

¶13

The Superintendent of Police, Kamareddy,^{KamareddyDistrict.}

¶14

4, The Station House Officer, Police Station, Kamareddy,^{KamareddyDistrict.}

¶15

Sarla Raju, S/o Anjaiah, aged 48^{years, Occ. Business, R/o Komervellivillage} and Mandal, Siddipet District.

¶16

.....RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition Under Article 226 ot the Constitution of^{lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit^{filed therewith, the High Court maybe} pleased to issue any appropriate Writ, Order or direction more^{in the natureof} Writ of Mandamus declaring the highhanded^{actionof the Respondent No.4 i.e.} Station House Officer, Police Station,^{Kamareddy,Kamareddy District in calling} the Petitioner to Police station^{without there being any FIR registered againsthim} and threatening him to settle the^{dispute with the Respondent No.s with regard to} Sale Transaction of his buses though^{the police have no jurisdiction to interfere} with the Civil Dispute and for directing^{the petitionerto settle the civil disputewith} the Respondent No.S is nothing^{but arbitrary, illegal, abuseof his powersvested} in the police and also contrary to the^{instructions issuedby the Respondent No.2}

¶18

from time to tine and also clear case of violation of Arlicles 14 and 21 of Constitution lndia apart from well settled principles of law laid down by this Hon'ble Court anrl the Hon'ble Apex Court in similar cases.

¶19

|.A.NO:1 OF 2025

¶20

Petition Under Section 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 the Respondents more particularly Respondent No.4 i.e. Station House Officer, Police Station, Kamareddy, Kamareddy District not t; call the petitioner to Police Station and not to insist him to settle the dispute with the Respondent No.5 with regard to Sale Transaction of his.buses pending dispc,sal of the above writ petition.

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI V.ROHITH

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : GP FOR HOME

¶23

Counsel for the Respondent No.S : -

¶24

The Court at the stage of admission made the following OIIDER

¶25

THE HON,BLE SRI JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR

¶26

Writ ition No.21490 of 2o25

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

Heard learned counsel for the^{petitioner, learnedGovernment} Pleader for Home appearing for^{respondent Nos.1to 4, and with the} consent of the learned counsel^{appearingfor the parties,the WritPetition} is taken up for hearing and disposal^{at the admission stage.}

¶29

Having regard to the manner of^{disposalof the Writ Petition at the} admission stage and the^{nature of /s involved, this Court is of the view} that notice to unofficial^{respondentNo.s is not necessaryfor adjudication} of the^present Wi'it Petition.

¶30

The case of the^petitioner, in brief,^{is that, the 4th respondentis} calling the^petitioner to the 4h^{respondent policestation without there} being any complaint or registering^{any case againstthe petitionerherein,} and threatening to settle the^{disputewith the 5th respondentin relation to} sale transaction of buses owned^{by the petitioner,his wife and daughter,} which action of the respondents-authorities^{it is contended as illegal,} arbitrary and in violation of^{Articles14 and21 of the Constitutionof India,} with a consequential direction to the^{respondentsnot to coerce the} petitioner to settle the dispute with the 5th respondent in^relation to^the aforesaid transaction.

¶31

¶32

¶33

Per contra, learned Government pleader for Fiome appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4, while denying the wril_ averments, would submit that murtipre FIRs are registered against the r)etitioner since the year 2020, wherein the authorities after conducting investigation have filed a charge sheet.

¶34

Learned Government pleader further su bmits that the 5th respondent herein had approached the respondents-authorities once again and lodged a complaint. and since, the contents of the compraint disclose commission of a cognizabre office, the authorit es have registered a case, vicle Crime No.356 of 2025 dt.l4.O7.2O2S for rhe offences under Sections 420, 409 and 506 of IpC, wherein the petition,tr herein long with his daughtr:r are arrayed as accused Nos.1 and 2.

¶35

6, Learned Government pleader would also sut)mit that on the 4th respondent registering the aforesaid crime, intendr:d to serve notice under Section 41-A cr.p.C./35(3) or BNSS to the rretitioner and his daughter; and that the petitioner and his daughter instead of receiving the aforesaid notice sought to be served by the responderrts_authorities and cooperating with the investigation, have approached tlis Court by filing the present Writ^petition making wild and baseless alleg;rtions.

¶36

7 Learned Government pleader would also submit that if only the petitioner and his daughter receive the notice untJer section 41_A

¶37

¶38

\ \

¶39

Cr.P.C./35(3) of BNSS sought to be serued by the respondents-authorities and furnish information/documents and cooperate with the investigation into the aforesaid crime, the authorities would take further action by in,estigating into the aforesaid crime in accordance with law.

¶40

B. The aforesaid submission made by the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 is taken on record.

¶41

Having regard tc the submissions made as above, and taking^note oF the fact that a case, vide Crime No.356 of 2025 dt.L4.07.2025^is registered against the petitioner herein as well as his daughter, wherein it is stated before this Court of the respondents-authorities intending to serve notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C./35(3) of BNSS, this Court is of the view that the petitioner and his daughter are to be directed to receive the aforesaid notices sought to be served by the respondents-a uthorities and furnish the information/documents for the respondents-authorities to undertake investigation into the aforesaid crime.

¶42

Further, this Court is of the view that on the respondentsauthorities serving the notice as noted hereinabove and the^petitioner furnishing information/documents in connection with Crime No.356 of 2025, the respondents-authorities are directed to take further action whlle investigating into the aforesaid crime strictly in accordance with law.

¶43

¶44

Subject to above directions, the Writ petition i; disposed of No

¶45

order as to costs.

¶46

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this writ petition shall stand closed.

¶47

SD/. AHMI:D ABDULLAH KHAN ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

hq" SECTION OFFICER

t. f.ng. Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretarial, State of Telangana at Hyderal)ad

¶52

The Director General of Police, Government of Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶53

The Superintendent of Police, Kamareddy, Kamareddy Distri6t.

¶54

The Station House Officer, Police Station, Kamareddy, Kamareddy District.

¶55

Two CCs to GP FOR HOME, High Court forthe State of Telangana at

¶56

Hyderabad. [OUTI

¶57

One CC to SRI V.ROHITH, Advocate IOPUCI

¶58

Two CD Copies

-t

HIGH COURT

DATED:2410712025

:
L;..1H' :j I4,r e'
o(
-.
10 jEP m5
,i
a) /'
)t
Or... - ..//.
.--

ORDER

WP.No.21490 of 2025

DISPOSING OF THE W.P

AT THE STAGE OF ADMISSION

¶69

WITHOUT COSTS.

¶70

,/o /z

¶71

Cheela Maruthi v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Cheela Maruthi v. State of Telangana

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

Sri. Sanem Krishna Goud Vs State of Telangana

Mr. Ghanshyam Das Karwa Vs The State of Telangana

Ramreddy Chicken Market Vs The State of Telangana and 3 others

Awqaf Committee H.E.H. the Nizam Vs the State of Telengana

Shaheen Begum Vs The State of Telangana

Khethavath Ghamsamma Vs The State of Telangana