Disposed

Sri Kodudula Naveen Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Dec 2025WP/37190/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition alleging police inaction on a criminal complaint. Upon hearing the parties and noting that the police had already registered an FIR and were investigating, the Court directed the authorities to follow due procedure and dispose of the petition with consent.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent authorities to follow due procedure for further course of action.

Sri Kodudula Naveen Reddy Vs The State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[^325s ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

THURSDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF DECEIMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT .

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR}

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 37190 OF 2025

¶8

Between:

¶9

Sri Kodudula Naveen Reddy, S/o.Koti^{Reddy,Aged about 32 years,Occ} Business, R:/o.H.No.1-24lC, lt/ushampally^{Village Nalgonda Town and District,} T,G.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

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

¶13

2 The Director General of Police, Government of^{TelanganaLakdikapool,} Hyderabad.

¶14

3 The Commissioner of Police,^{RachakondaPoliceCommissionerate} Rachakonda.

¶15

4 The Deputy Commissioner of^{Police, L..B.Nagar Zone, Rachakonda} Commissionerate Rachakonda.

¶16

5 The Assistant Commissioner of^{Police,Vanasthalipuram Division Rachakonda} Commissionerate Rachakonda.

¶17

6 The Station House Officer,^{L4eerpetPolice Station Rachakonda} Commissionerate Ranga Reddy^District.

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of^{lndiaprayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the^{affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be} pleased to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction,^{moreparticularlyonein} ihe nature of Writ of Mandamus,^{declaring the action of the Respondent Nos.2 to} 6 more particularly the 6th respondent^{in failingto initiate action on the complaint} filed by the^petitioner dt.27t1112025^{under acknowledgement againstthe named} accused as illegal, arbitrary,^{unconstitutionaland violation of Article 14 & 21 of} constitution of lndia and contrary^{to the provisions of BNSS and consequentlyby} direct the Respondent^{Nos.2 to 6 more particularlythe 6th respondent to initiate} immediate action on the complaint^{filed by the petitionerdt.2711112o25under}

¶20

acknowledgment agarnst the named accused in accordance rr th the provisions of BNSS

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶22

Petition under Section^'151 CPC praying that in the crr I rmstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cour nay be pleased to direct the Respondent Nos.2 to 6 more particularly the 6th res rondent to forthwith initiate action as per law against the named culprits on the r < mplaint filed by the petitioner dt.2711112025, pending disposal of the above writ p€ ition

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI C. HARI PREETH

¶24

Counsel for the Respondents: ASST. Gp FOR HOME

¶25

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶26

i i I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I

¶27

I t

¶28

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶29

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶30

WRIT PETITION No.3719O of 2O2S

¶31

DATE OF. ORDER: 18. 12.ZO2S

¶32

Between:

¶33

Sri Kodudula Naveen Reddy

¶34

...Petitioner

¶35

AND

¶36

The state of Telangana, represented by its principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and {lve others

¶37

..,Respondents

¶38

ORDER:

¶39

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 6. With their consent, this writ petition is being taken up for disposal.

¶40

This writ petition is hled questioning the action of the respondent Nos.2 to 6 more particularly the 6tr' respondent in failing to initiate action on the complaint frled by the petitioner dated 27.11.2025 under acknowledgement against the named accused as being illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violation of Article 14 and 21 of the constitution of India and contrarJr to the provisions of BNSS and seeking a consequential direction to 6th respondent to initiate immediate action on the complaint filed by

¶41

-'l l

¶42

¶43

the petitioner dated 22.L1.2025 under ackno.{ lr: [gsrn.., against the named accused in accordalce with the provisir rs of BNSS.

¶44

Learned Assistant Government pleader apl), aring for Home has placed the written instruction submitted b1r t | : Sub-lnspector of Police, Meerpet police Station, Rachakonda I cmmissionerate rvherein it is submitted that a petition ri,as recei'e r on 27.1I.2O25 by the 6tt respondent through Speed post and G.D :ntry was made and thereafter 6n respondent registered a case in o ime No. 16s2 of 2025underSections118(t),351 (2), i40(3) read rLth3(5) of BNS and took up investigation which is underway and r,. 11 be compieted as expeditiously as possibre and a report under lection 1 93 of BNSS either way will be fi1ed before the trial Cour . A copy of the F.l.R has been piaced before this Court and the r ame has been furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶45

In that view of the matter, since the F.I.R hir I already been registered against the complaint fiied by the petiri rner, this writ petition is disposed of with consent directing ..1 e respondent authorities to foilow due procedure as contemplateri under law for further course of action. It is made clear that the retitioner may seek appropriate remedy as availabie under law.

¶46

With these observations, this writ petition is dl posed of with consent.

¶47

¶48

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

¶49

closed. No order as to costs.

¶50

l/l

¶51

SO/.P.PONNA KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

1 The Principal Secretary, Home^{Department, The Stateof Telangana,} Secretariat. Hyderabad.

¶57

2 The Director General of Police,^{Governmentof TelanganaLakdikapool,} Hvderabad.

¶58

3 The Commissioner of Police,^{Rachakonda Police Commissionerate} Rachakonda.

¶59

4 The Deputy Commissioner^{of Police, L..B.Nagar Zone, Rachakonda} Commissionerate Rachakonda.

¶60

5 The Assistant Commissioner^{of Police,Vanasthalipuram DivisionRachakonda} Commissionerate Rachakonda.

¶61

The Station House Officer,^{$,4eerpetPoliceStation Rachakonda} Commissionerate Ranga Reddy^District.

¶62

one cc to sRl c. HARI^{PREETH, Advocate} [oPUC] 8. Two CCs to GP FOR^{HOtVlE, HighCourt for the Stateof Telangana} touTl 9. Two CD Copies BN

HIGH COURT

DATED:1811212025

ORDER

WP.No.37190 of²⁰²⁵

t
1E s r;L:l'€,:il
-x.<br>,\ \
((,
t) ?lfiri
W
I
2'

¶69

DISPOSING OF THE^{WRIT PETITION} WITHOUT COSTS

¶70

Sri Kodudula Naveen Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Kodudula Naveen Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Kurmaiah Goud Vs The State of Telangana

Tcs Mahabub Nagar Group Vs State of Telangana

Barla Ankulu Vs The State of Telangana

Balasani Nishanth Goud Vs The State of Telangana

Mohd Rizwan Ilyas Vs The State of Telangana

Dharmarajula Venkateswara Rao, Vs The State of Telangana