Disposed¶50

Jeeripothula Pattabhi Ramaiah v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC19 Aug 2025WP/24471/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

FIR registration inaction by police; writ of mandamus under Article 226; S.154(3) Cr.P.C.; S.173(4) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS); Articles 14, 15, 21; Section 151 CPC application; closure of complaint as 'false'; liberty to seek appropriate remedy under law; disposal at admission stage by consent; Superintendent of Police Nalgonda; SHO I Town Police Station Miryalaguda; attack dated 21.04.2025; representation dated 10.05.2025; notice dated 17.08.2025 by registered post; DE entry 11.05.2025; Telangana High Court; Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar; Writ Petition No.24471 of 2025; decided 19.08.2025; disposed without costs.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy as available under law; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand closed; no order as to costs. ¶50

Jeeripothula Pattabhi Ramaiah Vs The State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty granted to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy as available under law; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand closed; no order as to costs.

¶50

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of Respondent No.3 (Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda) in not registering an F.I.R. against Respondent Nos.6 to 15, who allegedly hatched a plan to kill the petitioner exploiting earlier disputes, despite the petitioner's complaint and representation dated 10.05.2025 under S.154(3) Cr.P.C. / S.173(4) BNSS, is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional. +1 more

¶27

Ratio / Principle

Recording the submissions made by learned counsel appearing on either side, and since the petitioner's complaint is closed as 'false', this writ petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy as available under law.

¶47

Key takeaways

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed; there shall be no order as to costs.ratio¶51

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Telangana High Court (Sri Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar), Writ Petition No.24471 of 2025, decided 19.08.2025 (disposed of at admission stage, with consent) — Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the Superintendent of Police, Nalgonda (R3) to follow S.154(3) Cr.P.C. or S.173(4), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and register an F.I.R. against respondents 6 to 15, alleged to have plotted to kill him taking advantage of earlier disputes; his complaint about his brother's killing was pending with the SHO, I Town P.S., Miryalaguda; he alleged an attack on 21.04.2025 and gave a representation dated 10.05.2025. The Assistant Government Pleader reported that a DE entry was made on 11.05.2025, witnesses MS.V.Sujatha (Superintendent, PDM Court, Miryalaguda) and Sri.Vidvasagar Reddy (Superintendent, 1st ADM Court, Miryalaguda) stated that neither Varalaxmi nor her sons attacked the petitioner, and the complaint was closed as 'false' with notice dated 17.08.2025 sent by registered post. Recording the submissions on either side and noting the closure, the Court disposed of the writ petition granting the petitioner liberty to seek appropriate remedy as available under law; pending miscellaneous applications closed; no costs.

¶1

[^32ss ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FORTHE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH^{DAY OF AUGUST} TWO THOUSAND AND^{TWENTY FIVE}

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR}

¶7

WRIT PETITION^{NO:24471OF 2025}

¶8

Between:

¶9

.leerioothula Pattabhi Ramaiah,^{S/o. Bixamaiah.Aged about58 years,} .occ ai,;i;i;l, Rl". ri.No.i-s0-22e,^{Housing Boardcolonv,Miryalguda Town' Nalsonda} District.

¶10

.....PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana,^{Rep.by its Principal Secretary' Home Department'} Secretariat Building,^{Secretariat,Hyderabad.}

¶13

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

¶14

The Superintendent^{of Police, Nalgonda' Nalgonda District'}

¶15

4'TheDeputySuperintendentofPolice,MiryalgudaDivision,NalgondaDistrict5.TheStationHouseofficer,lTownPoliceStation'MiryalgudaTown,Nalgonda District.

¶16

6 Narsingh Srinu,^{S/o. N-Janaiah,Aged about 45 years, Occ ; Agriculture'R/o.} lndia K-otaiahgudem^{Village, Tripuraram Mandal, Nalgonda District}

¶17

1. Rathikindi Ramulu,^{S/o. {amaiah, Aged about 45 years,Occ ; Agriculture'R/o} Kamareddygudem^{Village, Tripuraram Mandal, NalgondaDiskict'}

¶18

Rathikindhl^{-Siioutu,Slo. RamaiahAged about53 years,Occ ; Agriculture'} R/o Mukundapuram^{Village, Tripuraram Mandal, Nalgonda District--.} ^

¶19

Venkanna, S/o.^{Not know'n,Aged about 55 years, Occ ; Business' C/o Swathi} Travels, Srilatha Hotle,^{Miryalaguda, R/o. Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda} District.

¶20

'1 0. Smt. Rathikindi Sayamrha, Wo Late Ramaiah' Aged about 65^{years' Occ;} Business, R/o. Mu[undapuram^{Village, Tripuraram Mandal, Nalgonda District'}

¶21

1. Smt. tvladha Mangamma,^{Wo. Mangaiah,Aged about56 years' Occ;} Business'R/o.ItlukundapuramVillage,TripuraramMandal'NalgondaDistrict.

¶22

Smt. Jerripothula^{Varalaxmi,Wo. LateSrinivas Aged about 49 years' Occ'} Employee, R/o. Ranganna^{Colony, Miryalaguda Town, NalgondaDistrict} -

¶23

Jer;ipothuia Shiva^{Kumar, S/o. Lite Srirrivas,Aoed about32 years' Occ; Pvt} ' R/o. Ranganna Colony,^{Miryalaguda Town, NalgondaDistricl}

¶24

14.Jer;ipothula Sharath "rpioy".,^Kumar, ,^{S/o. LateSrinivas, Aged about28 years'-Occ;} Pvt.,'Employee,^{R/o. Ranganna Colony, Ir/iryalaguda Town' Nalgonda District}

¶25

15_Jerripothula Jikki alias Ganesh,^{S/o Late Srinivas Aged about23 years, occ ;} Pvt., Employee, R/o. Ranganna Colony,^{Miryalaguda Town, Nalgonda District'}

¶26

.....RESPONDENTS

¶27

Petition Under Article²²⁶ ol^{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^{[Vlandamus declaringthe action of the Respondent No.3 in} non-following the^{provisions of the criminalProcedurecode Section 154 (3) of} cr.P.c. nor section¹⁷ 3(4)^{of B.N.S S. and non-initiating to take the necessary} action non-initiating^{and non-initiating to register F.l.R. against the Respottdent} Nos.6 to 15 who hatched^{a plan to kill the Petitionerby takrng the advantageof} earlier disputes between^{the Petitioner and Respondent Nos.6 to 15 is illegal,} arbitrary, u nconstitutrona^{I and violationof Articles14, 15,21and constitution of} lndia and also violation of^{Principlesof NaturalJustice and consequently direct} the Respondent No.3^{to follow the provisions of the criminal Procedure code} Section 154 (3) of^Cr.P C.^{or Section 173(4) of B.N.S.SAct and take the} necessary action and register^{the F.l.R. against the Respondent Nos. 6 to 15 who} are trying to kill the^Petitioner.

¶28

|.A.NO:1 OF 2025

¶29

Petition Under Section 151 CPC^{praying that in the circumstances statedin} the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition, the High Courtmay be pleasedto} direct the Respondent No.3 to^{followthe provisions of the criminalProcedure} Code Section 154⁽³⁾ of Cr.P.C^{or Section173(4) of B N S.S. Act and takethe} necessary action and register^{the F.l.R. against the Respondent Nos. 6 to '15 who} are trying to kill the Petitioner^{pending disposal of the writ petition.}

¶30

Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI RAPOLU^BHASKAR

¶31

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5 : GP FOR^HOME

¶32

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 to 15 : -

¶33

The Court at the stage of admission made^{the followingORDER}

¶34

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶35

WRIT PETITION No.24471 of 2025

¶36

OI{DER

¶37

l lcartl learncci counsel for thc pctitioncr and Sri.M.Srinivas, lcarnctl Assistant^{GovcrnmentPlcaderfor Home aPpearingfor respondent Nos.1 to 5} With thcir^{consent, this writ pctition is bcing takenup for disposalat thc} admission^{stage itsclf}

¶38

This writ petition has been filed seeking the following prayer:-

¶39

"lo declnre tlrc actiott oJ tlu' Rcspondent No.3 in non-follotoing the proaisiorts of tlLe Crininal Prot'edure Code Section 154 (3) of Cr.P.C nor Sectiotr 173(4) oJ Il.N.S.S trul rrcn-tnitinting to take the nacessanl nctiotr nott iniliatutg aul nortnrtirtttttg b register F.l.R against tlt Respottdenl Nos.6 fo 75 u,lut htlc)rd a pLrtn to kill the Petitioner by tnking tlrc ldz)ant Sc of earlu'v disltu'rcs behoeen the Petitioner and RespotdetLl Nos.6 Io 15 is iLiegal, nrbitrnry, unconstitutional and uiolntion of Articlcs^"14, 15. 27 tttd Conslitution o.f Indin and aLso ttolntiort o[ Principles o.f NthLn,L ]us[itc and consequently direct lhe llasporLdcnt No.3 to .folloro the prot'tsions of tlrc CriminaL Proceclure Ctde Scctiott 1!j4 (3) of Cr.l'}.C or Scctiou 173 (4) of B.N.S.S Act nnd tnke the necessnnl ac.tion nnrl register tlv F.l.R against the Responrlent Nos.6 to 15 tuho nre trying to kiLL Llte Petil"torLer."

¶40

tsriel facts stated in this rn rit petition are that petitioner is alleging that rcsponde.nI Nos.6 to 15 killed^l.ris brolhcr Sri.J.Srinivas filed complaint beforc respondent No.5 poiice station ;rntl tl'.c sarne is pending for investigation. Thcreafter, responclent Nob.6 to 15 attacked the petitioner on 21.04.2025 and the peIitioncr maLlc arroLl-lcr conrplairlt L'c[ort' respondent No.5. How'er.er, r,r,hen the responclent No.5 ditl not in itiate any action against respondent Nos.6 to 15, pctitioner madc rcpresentation datcd 10.05.2025 and requested resporrdet-rl^No.3 to follow, Section l-.1 (l]) of Cr.P.C or Section 17j (4) of

¶41

¶42

¶43

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (l"rcrein aftcr rcferred as 'BNSS') and take appropriate action in the mattcr_

¶44

Learncd counsel for the potitioner submits ihat inspite of the representation datecl I0.05.2025, responLlcnl authoritics ciicl not initiate anv action aElainst respondent Nos.6 b^.15. Aggrieved br,. the samc, this writ petition is filecl

¶45

Learnecl Assistant Government pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 5 submits that as per instructions issued by SubInspector of^{police, pS} Mirvalaguda_l fon,n, Nalgoncl.r District, respondent No.5 on petitioner's compraint, rnacrc cD cntr' on r r.05.2025 and startccl invcstigation and examined i.t,itncss i.e., MS.V.Sujatha, Superintendent of PDM Court, Mirvalaguda ancl Sri.Viclvasagar Reddv, Supcrjntenderlt of 1sr ADM Court, N4irvalagucla and rcc.rclccl rheir stater-.ents that neither J^Varalaxmi nor lrer sors attacked thc petitioner. it is further submitted that after compretion of e.quirv, the petitioner cohrpraint rvas crosed as ,false, on 77 '08 2025 and a ,otice rlatcrl 17.0g.2025 ,t,as arso scnt to thc petitioner by registered post.

¶46

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioncr prai,this Court to grant libcrty to petitione. to scek appropriatc remed,v as availabie urrder law.

¶47

Recorciinil the submissions maclc by the learrred cc.,unsel appearing on either side a,d si^ce the petitioner,s complaint is closecl as ,,false,,, this writ

¶48

petition is clisposcil of granting Irberty to pctitioner to seek appropriarc

¶49

remedy as availablc unc{cr law.

¶50

8 Accordinglv, tl-ris r.r,.ri t petitror-r 1S disposed of. Miscellaneous

¶51

applications, if anv penciing, sh:rll st.-rncl closed. No ordcr as to costs

¶52

//TRUE COPY//

¶53

SD/.MOHD. ISMAIL DEPUTY REGISTRAR

¶54

SECTION OFFICER

¶55

¶56

The Principal Secretary, Home Department, Se riat B uilding, Secretariat, State of Telangana at Hyderabad

¶57

2a The Director GeneralThe Superintendent of of Police, Police, NalgonTelan gana, da, Nalgonda DistrictHyderabaci

¶58

4 The Deputy Superintendent of Police, lvliryalguda Division, Nalgonda District The Station House Officer, I Town Police Station, Miryalguda Town, Nalgonda Diskict

¶59