Petitioner alleged dowry harassment by her husband's family and complained of police closing her complaint without enquiry despite an undertaking-cum-declaration for permanent alimony. Authorities pointed to a pending FIR under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 DP Act on identical facts; the writ petition was disposed with observations.
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.
[325s r
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO: 24617 OF 2025
Between:
Siddamoni Poojilha, D/o Ramachandraiah, aged about 25 years, Occ ; Household, Rl/o Dodlapahad Village, t/adgul t\ulandat, Ranga Reddy Distiict.
.....PETITIONER
AND
.....RESPONDENTS
Petrtion 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 lVlandamus, to declare the inaction of the respondent No.2 in giving necessary orders to the 3rd respondent herein pursuant to the complaint dt. 11-8-2025, for taking action against the unofficial respondents basing on the
7
complaint dt. 16-7-2025 which was closed, without ass;rring un, ,.urron,: ,, being illegal, arbitranl, unjust and u ncon Stitutiona l. and r rnsequen y direct the 2nd respondent to issue necessary orders pursuant to t E compraint dt. 1r-B2025.
l.A.NO:1 OF 2025
. Petition Under liection 151 cpc praying that in the ( roumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court n.ay be pleased to pass orders directing the respondent No.3 herein to forthwith rtr;ister the FIR against the unofficial responrlents pursuant to the complaint d. 16-7-2025, pending disposal of the main writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI KASTHURI SURENDER
Counsel forthe Respondent Nos.1 to 3: Gp FOR HOME
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.4 to g : _
The Court made the following ORDER
THE HONOURABLE SRI IUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
WRIT PETITION No.24617 of 2025
ORDER
I {earc1 learrrc.d counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistarlt Covcrnment Pleac-ler for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3. With their consent, this writ petition is being taken up for disposal at the aclrnission stage itsclf
!- --=I
l
\
Tl.rereafter, the petitioner lodgecl a complaint bcfot. ;, , respondcnt. The un-official responclcnts rrave sent mediation for set .rnent of the issue wherein the ur-r-official respondents have agrced to I rv Rs.36,0 0,000/ _ to the petitioner- tolr'artls permanent arimony arrcr to that effect an undertaking-cu*-dt:cla ration datcd 16.04.2025 was r ,r,cuted a.d paid a sunr of Rs.1,00,000/-. lt is further subrnitted that exr ,l,t Rs.1,00,000/_ no further amounts arc p-r2 i6l and all tlte un_official res.,)lldents conspired together and hatcheil a plan ancl failecl to kecp uL) thLrir promise. Thcreafter, petiti.r.e.rade comprlai.t o, 16.07.2025 t he 3-r responclent against un-official rr.spondents for their cleceitful acts rrd breach of h.ust and tl're said corrplaint rvas receivetl b1, the 3,,r respo .Llent ort 23.07.2025 and petitioner rcccivcrl a lnessagc to lrer mobile p r(,]1e on 37.07.2025 stating that her complaint reccived ancl closed. It is frr ,lrer submitted that 3,d respondent rvitltout conducting ally sort of cn. irr11, and without affording her reasonable opportunitl.of being hearcl, rrilaterally closed her cornplaint anil aggrieved by thc closure of the cr nplaint, petitioner has given another coutplaint on j1.0g.2025 before 2nd r '; prondent bringing all the factual rnatrix a.cl requested to give necessal orders to the 3d responclent to tak. acti.l-r against tr-rc un-officiar resp( r({ents. Basing on the cornplaint datt'd 16.07.2025, no action was receiver Questioning the same, the present rvr.it petition is filed.
J
I
I
already registerr:d vide F.l.R.No.24g of 2025 ctated tl .07 2025, they shall follow due proc,edure as contemplated under law. ,' r' further course of action.
6 With these observations, this rvrit petition is clil .,,rse<.1 of
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, sh stand closed. No
order as to costs
t t
S D/. C. DEEPIKA a9S s T REGIST //TRUE COPY// .' To SECTION OFFICER 1 lifiiJ$:'f*tecretary' Home Department,secretariailitate of reransana potice, Rachakonda Commissior :rate, Nacharam, Ilfi 3lr;,:l"..nerof q43 Iffi":"";::,frip* The S^tation House Officer,Horrae. VqgSrfniir, cJ,in police Station,#in5's'tllJl R.R. rr"r"ns,n" .;1r;61. "t 6 One CC to SRt XASfUuRt SURENDER, Advocate [OF .rr]l Two CD Copies SA GJP Ari.. uJ/.
HIGH COURT
DATED:1 010912025
r"i ,
i. l5ii?i-fi
\ ..
ORDER
WP.No.24617 of 2025
DISPOSING OF THE W.P
WITHOUT COSTS.
@rI
,E
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Commissioner's inaction on the petitioner's complaints regarding closure without reasons was illegal and required a direction to act.
Whether an FIR already registered under Section 498-A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 DP Act on the same facts obviated fresh registration.
4 provisions across 4 enactments
Siddamoni Poojilha
The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department
The Commissioner of Police, Rachakonda Commissionerate
The Station House Officer, Madgul Police Station
Muddam Raju
Muddam Narasimha
N.V. Shravan Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
