Dismissed¶43

S.Narsimlu v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC22 Aug 2025WP/36138/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR; Article 226; Articles 14, 21 and 300A; FIR No. 107/2016 dated 26-04-2016; P.S. Mahabubnagar II Town; Crime No. 10S/107 of 2016; Section 151 CPC no-arrest interim petition (M.P. No. 445); dismissal as infructuous; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions closed; counsel K. Amarnath Reddy for petitioner; R. Laxmikanth Reddy, AGP for Home for Respondents 1-3; Respondent 4 Srikanth Reddy (no counsel shown); Justice N. Tukaramji; decided 22-08-2025.

What did the court decide?

Recording the submissions of both learned counsel — counsel for the petitioner having submitted that the cause of action no longer survived for adjudication and sought dismissal as infructuous, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader raising no objection — the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous, with no order as to costs. ¶43

S.Narsimlu Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

13217 |

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TEI.ANGANA AT HYDERABAD (special Original Jurisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND OAYOF AUGUST TWO THOUSANDAND TWENry FN/E

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRl JUSTICE N.TI'KARAMJI

¶6

WRIT PETITI ON NO: 36138 OF 2016

¶7

Between:

¶8

S.Narsimlu,. S/o. S.Narayana, Aged about zl4 1pars, Occ: Business, Ri/o. Boyapalli Gate, Mahaboobnagar District.

¶9

...PETIT!ONER

¶10

AND

¶11

The State.oJ T,qlgnggla, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, H<ifire Department, l

¶12

Secretariat Building, Hyderabad.^-

¶13

The District Superintendent of Police, .Mahaboobnagar District, Mahaboobnagar.

¶14

The Station House Offrcer, Mahaboobnagar ll Town police Station, Mahaboobnagar,MahaboobnagarDistrict.^-

¶15

Srikanth Reddy, S/o. Damodar Reddy, Aoed about 4O vears. Occ: Business. Rl/ o. H. No. 1- 10- 52 I A 2, Shashalgu1ta, Mahabubnagar, Mahabubnagai District.

¶16

, ...RESPONDENTS

¶17

Petition under Article 226 ot 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 of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction(s) calling for the records, relating to the FIR No. 1[Vl2l16dated 26{42016 registered by the Respondent No.3 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional : and quash the same being violative of Articleq 14, 21 and 3OO4 of the constitution of lndia, and contrary to the provisions of the criminal procedure code and also in violation of the^principle of Natural justice and personal liberty.

¶18

tl.^No: 1^{oF r0i6ruPMP.} No:⁴⁴⁵

¶19

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 direct : the respondent No.3 herein not to arrest the Petitioner herein in Crime No.10S of 2016: registered before P.s. Mahabubnagar ll Town, Mahabubnagar:, Mahabubnagar District, pending disposal of the Writ^petition.

¶20

CounselforthePetitioner:SRlK.AMARNATHREDDY

¶21

counselforthe Respondents No.1 to 3: SRI R. LA]XMIKANTH REDDY, AGP FOR HOME

¶22

Counsel fortlre Respondent No.4: -

¶23

The Court lnode the followirg: ORDER

I I

THE HONOURABLE^SRr rusTICE^N.TUKAMII{I

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

¶30

This !7rit Petition is filed^{under Article226 of Constitution}

¶31

I \

¶32

"...to issue a writ of^{Certiomriot any other apptoptiate!7tit Older or} Dfuections calling for the records^{releting to the FIRNo.107} /2016^&ted 26.M.2016 registered by the^{Respondent No.3 as illegal. arbiqrraod} uoconstitutional and quash the^{same beingviolativeof} Artidqs;^{1,4 31} 44d 300A of the Constitution of^{India and cootraryto the} Pnovisions^{of the} Cdmind Procedure Code and^also in^{violationof the Pdogble of Njrtufal} iustice^{and personalliberty...."}

¶33

Heard Mr.K.Amarnath Reddy,^{learned counsel for the}

¶34

Peuuonef and Mr.R.Laxmikanth Reddy, learned^Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for^f,esPondent Nos.l to 3.

¶35

I-eamed counsel for the petitioner submits^{that the cause of} action in the present writ^petition no longer sutvives for adiudication and, therefore,^{seeks dismissd of the writ petitionas}

infrucArous.

t:-