Chintya Joseph Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

Chintya Joseph Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Permission to withdraw the writ petition; petition dismissed as withdrawn without costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed. No substantive relief granted.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of Respondent No. 3 in closing the Petitioners' complaints, including the one bearing acknowledgment No. HYD/LLG_HYD1270625100146, without registering FIRs is arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, and contrary to the law laid down in Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of UP., (2014) 2 SCC 1. (Raised in the petitioners' prayer; not adjudicated, as the petition was withdrawn.) +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Upon the petitioner seeking permission to withdraw, the Court accorded permission and dismissed Writ Petition No. 23890 of 2025 as withdrawn, without costs.

Key takeaways

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed, with no costs imposed.ratio¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (Special Original Jurisdiction), single Judge (Hon'ble Sri Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar), 14-08-2025: Writ Petition No. 23890 of 2025 — Chintya Joseph & Anr. v. State of Telangana & Ors. The petitioners (housewives of Tarnaka, Secunderabad) sought a mandamus declaring arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional (Arts. 14 & 21, and contrary to Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of UP., (2014) 2 SCC 1) the action of Respondent No. 3, the Station House Officer, Lalaguda Police Station, in closing their complaints — including complaint bearing acknowledgment No. HYD/LLG_HYD1270625100146 — without registering FIRs; they further sought a direction to Respondent No. 3 to receive the complaints, register FIRs under the relevant provisions of BNS, and take lawful action against Respondent No. 4 (Mr. K.N. Samrat). An associated IA No. 1 of 2025 under Section 151 CPC repeated the prayer. Before any adjudication, learned counsel for the petitioners sought leave to withdraw; the Court accorded permission and dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn, ordering pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, to stand closed, without costs. No issue was decided on merits; the Lalita Kumari reference stands merely as cited in the prayer (referred).

[³²⁵⁵¹

I ) l i i i ! ;

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

THURSDAY,THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

WRIT PETITION NO: 23890 OF 2025

Between:

Chintya Joseph, Wo Theodore Francis Joseph, Aged about 48^years, Occ Household, Rl/o. Tarnaka, Secunderabad, Hyderabad

[/rs. Anitha Mathias, W/o Louis lVathias, Aged about 46^years, Occ Household, Rl/o. Tarnaka, Secunderabad, Hyderabad

...PETITIONERS

AND

1 The State of Telangana, Represented by the Secretary, Home Department, Government of Telangana, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad, Telangana.

2 The Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad Police Commissionerate, Hyderabad.

3 The Station House Officer, Lalaguda Police Station, Secunderabad^- 5000'17, Telangana State.

4 Mr. K.N. Samrat, S/o Not Known to Petitioners No 1-9-9218, Street No 18, Ramnagar, Hyderabad - 500044

...RESPONDENTS

Petition under Article 226 oI the Constitution of lndia^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be^pleased to.

a) lssue a Writ, Order or Direction more^particularly one in the nature of f\ilandamus, declaring the action of the 3rd Respondent in closing the complaints of the Petitioners, including the one bearing acknowledgment No. HYD/LLG_HYD1270625100146, without registering FlRs, as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and contrary to lawlaid down in Lalita Kumari v. Govt. of UP., (2O14) 2 SCC^1.,

b) Direct the 3rd Respondent to forthwith receive the complaints filed by the Petitioners, register appropriate FIRS under the relevant^provisions of BNS, and take lawful action against the 4th Respondent

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the t;ircumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased to issue a direction or order declare action of respondent N0.3, arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia^and contrary to taw and reopen the complaint filed by the^petition and register the FIR

Counsel for the Petitioners: M/s. MUSTAFA BASITH

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3: GP FOR HOME

Counsel for the Respondent NO.4: ---

The Court made the following: ORDER

t@

HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR}

Writ Petition^{No.2389Oof 2025}

ORDER:

When the matter^{is taken up for hearing, learned counsel} for the petitioner^{seeks permission of this Court to u'ithdrau' the} present writ Petition.

Permission is^{accorded to withdraw the r'vrit petition}

Accordingtv,^{the writpetitionisdismissed as}

withdrawn

Misceilaneous^{petitions,ifany, pending inthis writ}

petltlon shall stand^{closed. No costs.}

SD/.B.^REKHARANI ANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE^COPY//

S TION OFFICER

To,

'1 . One CC to SRl. MUSTAFA^{BASITHAdvocate[OPUCI}

Two^{CCs to GP FORHOME} 'High^{Court for the State of Telangana [OUTI} 3. Two^{CD CoPies} KKS LS^(r-

HIGH COURT

DATED:1410812025

I e
rl
(,
il 3 sEP 2025
<br>.i.,, \rx r,r r, - (,

ORDER

WP.No.23890 of 2025

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION AS WITHDRAWN WITHOUT COSTS

6."q(d\ ft("