Dismissed¶38

Kandaswamy Umapathi, Rr Dist v. Prl. Secretary, Home Dept., Hyd and 4 Others

Telangana HC3 Nov 2025WP/26716/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court; WRIT PETITION NO:26716 OF 2017; Kandaswamy Umapathi v. State of Telangana and others; Article 226 Constitution of India; writ of Mandamus; Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement; summons dated 27.07.2017; FIR No. 235 of 2016; FIR Nos. 27, 35 and 49 of 2017; CCS Police Hyderabad; XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Nampally; Sri B. Sailesh Saxena Advocate; Section 151 CPC stay application (WPMP No. 33138 of 2017); writ petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty; no costs; miscellaneous petitions closed; Justice N. Tukaramji; decided 03-11-2025.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to avail other remedies available under law; dismissed as withdrawn without costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed. ¶38

Kandaswamy Umapathi, Rr Dist Vs Prl. Secretary… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to avail other remedies available under law; dismissed as withdrawn without costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.

¶38

Issue for consideration

Whether the action of respondents 4 and 5 in compelling the petitioner to give evidence and issuing summons dated 27.07.2017 in FIR Nos. 235 of 2016, 27, 35 and 49 of 2017 of CCS Police, Hyderabad, to make statements under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, allegedly to give false statements against Sri B. Sailesh Saxena, Advocate, is illegal, arbitrary, null and void. (Framed by the petitioner; not adjudicated as the petition was withdrawn.)

¶17

Ratio / Principle

Leave was granted to the petitioner, through counsel, to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to avail other remedies available under law.

¶33

Key takeaways

The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed for.ratio¶38
Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.ratio¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition No. 26716 of 2017 (High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad, Justice N. Tukaramji, 03-11-2025): Kandaswamy Umapathi filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a writ of Mandamus against the action of respondents 4 and 5 (Deputy Commissioner of Police and Assistant Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Station, Hyderabad) in compelling him to give evidence pursuant to summons dated 27.07.2017 in FIR Nos. 235 of 2016, 27, 35 and 49 of 2017 of CCS Police, Hyderabad, and to make statements under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the Hon'ble XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, allegedly to give false statements against Sri B. Sailesh Saxena, Advocate. An interlocutory application (I.A. No. 1 of 2017 / WPMP No. 33138 of 2017) under Section 151 CPC had sought a stay of the summons proceedings. At hearing, counsel for the petitioner (Ms. Afsha Khanam for Sri G L Narasimha Rao) sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to avail other remedies; permission was accorded and the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty as prayed for, without costs, and pending miscellaneous petitions stood closed. The merits of the challenge to the police action were not adjudicated.

¶1

132171

¶2

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

¶3

MONDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:26716 OF 2017

¶7

Between:

¶8

KANDASWAMY UMAPATHI, RB DIST, Wio. Kandaswamy, aged about 62 years, Occ: .S.ec_ur_lly_Watchman Rl/o. 289, Sri Sri Homes, Aimaiguda, Sarooi Nagar Mandal, R.R. District.

¶9

...PETITIONER

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State of Telangana,_ Rep.by its Principat Secretary, Home Depa(ment, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad.

¶12

2 The Director General of Police, Telangana State, Lakdikapool, Hyderabad.

¶13

3 The Commissioner of Police, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad., -

¶14

4 The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Station, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad.

¶15

The Assistant Commissioenr of Police, Central Crime Station, DD, Hyderabad.

¶16

...RESPONOENTS

¶17

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, declaring the action of the respondents 4 and 5 herein in compelling the petitioner to give the evidence and issued the summons dated27.07.2017 in FIR No..235 oI 2016,27 of 2017,35 of ZO17,49 of 2017 of CCS Police, Hyderabad to give false statement under 164 cr.p.c. before, the Honble XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad against the Sri B. Sailesh Saxena, Advocate and pouring threats on the petitioner by giving training to the petitioner to say that sri B. sailesh Saxena, Advocate used to fabricate the documents of some property and the petitioner used to help him to

¶18

prepare the rubber stamps of various authorities and the same is given to Sri B. Sailesh Saxena, Advocate to prepare fabricated documents and harassing the petitioner in this regard as illegal, arbitrary, null and void and for a consequential prior to direct the respondents not to take the petitioner into their custody to give false statements against Sri B. Sailesh Saxena, Advocate before the Hon'ble Magistrate concerned

¶19

l.A. NO: 1OF 2017(WPMP. NO: 33138 OF 2017)

¶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 stay of all further proceedings in issuing summons for giving 164 of Cr.P.C. statements in FIR No. 235 of 2016, 27 of 2017,35 of 2O17,49 of 2017 of PS CCS, Hyderabad by the Hon'ble XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, pending disposal of the above Writ Petition

¶21

Counsel for the Petitioner : Ms. AFSHA KHANAM, COUNSEL REPRESENTING FOR SRI G L NARASIMHA RAO

¶22

Counsel for the Respondents: SRI D. PRADEEP, AGP FOR HOME

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

¶25

THE HONOT'RABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TT'KARAMJI WRIT PEf,ITION No.26716 OF 2OL7

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

This Writ Petition is frled under Article 226 of

¶28

Constitution of India seeking the following relief/s:-

¶29

¶30

"...to issue a Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in ttre nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents 4 and 5 herein in compelling the petitioner to give the evidence and issued the sumrnons dated- 27.O7.2O 17 in FIR No..235 of 2016, 27 ot 2Or7, 35 of 2017,49 of 2017 of CCS Police, Hyderabad to give fa-lse statement under 164 Cr.P.C. before, the Honble XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad against the Sri B. Sailesh Saxena, Advocate and pouring threats on the petitioner by gr,ritts training to the petitioner to say that Sri B. Sailesh Saxena, Advocate used to fabricate the documents of some property and the petitioner used to help him to prepare the rubber stamps of various authorities and the same is given to Sri B. Sailesh Saxena, Advocate to prepare fabricated documents and harassing the petitioner in this regard as illegal, arbitrary, null and void and for a consequential prior to direct the respondents not to take the petitioner into their custody to give false statements against Sri B. Sailesh Saxena, Advocate before the Hon'ble Magistrate concemed and pass-. -"

¶31

¶32

When the matter is taken up for hearing, Ms.Afsha Khanam, learned counsel representing Mr.G.L.Narsimha Rao, learned counsel for ttre petitioner sought permission of

¶33

this Court to withdraw the writ Petition with a liberty to avail

¶34

other remedies available under law.

¶35

3 Permission is accorded. I {

¶36

¶37