Pashupathi Nath Pala, Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

Pashupathi Nath Pala, Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the writ petition was dismissed as infructuous, with no order as to costs, and pending miscellaneous applications were closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondents 2 to 4 in interfering with the petitioner's personal life by calling him frequently to Jubilee Hills Police Station and detaining him there for long hours without cause or reason was arbitrary and capricious and violative of Art. 20(A) of the Constitution of India (raised in the petition; NOT adjudicated on the merits by the Court). +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Upon recording the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the cause in the writ petition did not survive for adjudication and the petition had become infructuous, the Court dismissed the Writ Petition as infructuous, with no order as to costs. No adjudication was made on the merits of the alleged police interference; counsel's submission is not adopted as a finding beyond the dismissal.

Key takeaways

Pending miscellaneous applications in the writ petition were directed to stand closed (operative line partially lost to OCR damage, printed as "Pending m US shall stand closed").ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Telangana High Court (Special Original Jurisdiction, Hyderabad) — WRIT PETITION No. 25564 OF 2016 — N. Tukaramji, J. — decided 15 September 2025. The petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India sought a writ of mandamus declaring arbitrary the action of respondents 2 to 4 (State of Telangana; SHO, Inspector and Sub-Inspector of Jubilee Hills Police Station) in interfering with the petitioner's personal life by frequent calls to, and long detentions at, Jubilee Hills Police Station, termed violative of Art. 20(A) as printed, with a consequential direction not to detain him there; I.A. No. 1 of 2016 (WPMP No. 31572 of 2016) under Section 151 CPC sought identical restraint pending disposal. At hearing, counsel for the petitioner (C. Rishik Reddy for Eranki Phani Kumar) submitted that the cause did not survive for adjudication and the petition had become infructuous; the Court recorded the submission and DISMISSED the writ petition AS INFRUCTUOUS, with no order as to costs, and closed the pending miscellaneous applications. No adjudication on the merits; no precedents cited or considered.

a

\

I I i I I ii i !i ii i, ii II li ll Iil ti II ti .i ! I : i ,i i I i ri it il i.l, t'

13217 1

HIGH COURT FOR THE^{STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD} (SPecial Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY, THE FIFTEENTH^{DAY OF SEPTEMBER} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI}

Between:

Pashuoathi Nath Pala,^{S/o.LateP.Padma Rao Aged} .50^{years, OccBusiness,} nlo.riirruo.A304, Fortune^{Towers, Madhapur, Hyderabad}

...PETITIONER

AND

The state of Telanganq, sep,by^{its Principal secretary, Home Department,} Secretariat Buildings,^HYderabad

The Station House^{Officer,Jubilee Hills PoliceStation, Hyderabad.}

SriVenkat Reddy,^{lnspector of Police, Jubilee Hills Police Station, Hyderabad.}

Sri Guru Swamy, Sub^{lnspector of Police, Jubilee Hills Police Station,} Hyderabad

...RESPONDENTS

, petition 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 a Writ, Order or^{Direction more particularly one in the nature of} Writ of Mandamus^{declaringthe actionof the respondents 2 to 4 in interfering} with the^{personal life} of^{the petitioner by calling frequentlyto the Police Station'} Jubilee Hills and detaining^{for long hours without any cause or reason being} arbitrary and capricious^{and violative of Art.20(A)of Constitutionof lndia with a} consequential direction^{againstthe respondents 2 to 4 not to disturbthe petitioner} by detaining him^{in Police Station Jubilee Hills.}

,ni.

.. .-::i.,.:::' r ,: li.+.,.,Ilii

t.A. NO: 1 OF 2016(WPMP.^{NO: 31572OF 2016)}

Petit on under Section 151 CPC^{prayingthat in the circumstancesstatedin} the affidavit filed in support^{of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to} direct the Flespondents^{2 lo 4 not to call the petitioner to police StationJubilee} Hills and rvrongfully detain in^{the policeStationby causing illegal detention} Pending dis;posal of the^{above writ petition.}

Counselfor the Petitioner:^{SRI C.RISHIK REDDY, reP.,SRIERANKIPHANI KUMAR}

Counsel for the Respondents:^{GP FOR HOME}

The Court rmade the following: ORDER

l!

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

WRIT PETITION No. 25564 OF 2016

ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article²²⁶ of the Constitution^{of lndia} seeking the following relief:

"... to lssue a Writ, Order or Direction, more^{pafticularly,} one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the^respondents 2 to 4 in interfering with the^personal tife of the^{petitioner by calting} frequently to the Police Station, Jubilee Hills and^{detaining for long} hours without any cause or reason being arbitrary and^{capricious and} violative of Art. 2O(A) of Constitution of tndia with a consequential diregtion against the respondenfs 2 to 4 not to disturb the^petitioner by detaining him in Police Station Jubitee^Hills, and^{fo pass such} other order or orders...''

Mr. C. Rishik Reddy, learned counsel, representing^{Mr. ErankiPhani}

Kumar, learned counsel for the^petitloner, submits^{that the cause in this writ} petition does not survive for adjudication and the^petition has become infructuous.

Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition is dismissed^as infructuous. No order as to costs.

Pending m US shall stand closed.

RINIVASA RE

\

//TRUE COPY/

OFFICER

To,

One CC to SRI ERANKT^{PHANI KUMAR, Advocate-} cI

Two CCs to GP^{FOR HOME, HighCourt for the State of Telangana.[OUT]}

Two CD CoPies.

BSK tu

PMK

/, t

HIGH COURT

DATEID i1510912025

ORDEIR

ri
06 ttB zffi
*

WP.Ncr .25564 of 2016

DISMISiSING THE WRIT PETITION AS INFRUICTUOUS WITHOUT COSTS J-r s q, f ,laa