Disposed

Dharmarajula Venkateswara Rao, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Dec 2025WP/38082/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Father sought quashing of a Lookout Circular against his son, accused in a dowry harassment FIR who was abroad; criminal proceedings against the petitioner and his wife were already quashed. The High Court suspended the LOC for a limited period, subject to surrender of passport on arrival and trial court permission for further travel.

What did the court decide?

LOC dated 14.11.2023 suspended from 25.01.2026 to 15.02.2026, subject to surrender of passport before trial court on arrival and court permission for travel; no costs; pending applications closed.

Dharmarajula Venkateswara Rao, Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

[^32s5 ]

¶3

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

¶4

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

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO: 38082 OF 2025

¶8

Betwee n:

¶9

Dharmarajula Venkateswara Rao, S/o. Sathyam, Aged about 65 years, Occ: Retired SCCL Employee, Rlo.7-9-72, New Gollagudem, Kothagudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

¶13

The Union of lndia, Rep. by its Under Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Bureau of lmmigration, New Delhi.

¶14

J- The Station House Officer, lll-Town, Kothagudem PS, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶15

¶16

The Superintendent of Police, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶17

Panthangi Veni Kiranmai, D/o, Ramarao, Aged about 29 years, Occ. Housewife, Rl/o. Q.No.138/2, BDCR Railway Quarters, Bhadrari Kothagudem Diskict.

¶18

...RESPONDENTS

¶19

Petition under A(icle 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 in issuing Lookout Circular No.1/SlC(ACK)lLOCt2023-16833, Dt.14111t2O23 issued by the 2nd Respondent herein as illegal, arbitrary and also violative of Article^'t 4, 16, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently issue a direction, directing the

¶20

Respondents herein not to prevent the Petitioner s son namely Ravi Kiran Dharmarajula (who is staying at Abroad and Accused in FIR No.'1 19 ot 2023, DL OBlO7l2023 on the file of the Kothagudem lll Town Police Station of Bhadradri Kothagudem District (CC No.402 of 2024 on the file of the Court of the ll Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Kothagudem) who is likely to visit lndia at the behest of the Sth Respondent Complaint forthwith.

¶21

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶22

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 suspend the Lookout Circular No.1/SlC(ACKltLOCl2O23-16833, Dt. 14111t2023 issued by the 2nd Respondent in connection with FIR No.119 of 2023, Dt. 0810712023 on the file of the Kothagudem lll Town Police Station of Bhadradri Kothagudem District pending disposal of the Writ Petition in the interest of the justice.

¶23

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI VEMPATI MALLIKARJUN SHASTRY

¶24

Gounsel forthe Respondents No.1, 3 to 4: GP FOR HOME

¶25

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI N. BHUJANGA RAO,

¶26

DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF INDIA

¶27

Counsel for the Respondent No.5: -

¶28

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶29

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAI)

¶30

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

¶31

WRIT PETITION No.38O82 of 2025

¶32

DATE oF oRDER:18. 12.2O25

¶33

Between:

¶34

Dharmarajula Venkateswara Rao, S/o Sathyam, aged about 65 Years, Occ: Retired SCCL trmployee, R/o 7-9-72, New Golagudem, Kothagudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶35

...Petitioner

¶36

AND

¶37

The state of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Dr. B.R.Ambedkar Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad and four others

¶38

...Respondents

¶39

ORDER:

¶40

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. With their consent, this writ petition is bcing taken up for disposal.

¶41

This writ petition is filed questioning the action of respondents in issuing Lookout Circular (for short "LOC")

¶42

No. 1/SIC(ACK)/LOC/2023- 16833, dated t4.1r.2023 issued by the 2"d respondent herein as being illegal, arbitlary and also violative of Articles 14, 16, i9 and 2l of tbe Constitution of India and seeking a consequential direction to respondents not to prevent the petitioner's son namely Ravi Kiran Dharmarajula who is staying at Abroad and Accused in F.l.R.No.179 ol 2023, dated O8.07.2O23 on the fiie of the Kothagudem III Town Police Station of Bhadradri Kothagudem District

¶43

¶44

(C.C.No.402 ol 2O24 on the lile of the Court of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Kothagudem) is likely to visit India at the behest of the sth respondent complaint forthwith.

¶45

The facts in brief as stated in the affidavit are that 5e respondent is the daughter in law of petitioner and marriage of petitioner's son with 5tt respondent was performed on 24.O4.2O19 and later both of them went to Australia, lead happy marital life and the Sft respondent due to some misunderstandings, returned to India on 06.11.2022 and later the son of petitioner requested the 5s respondent to accompany him to Australia but she refused as such his son left to Australia for the purpose of his employment.

¶46

i. Thereafter, Sth respondent lodged a complaint on O8.O7 .2023 before the 3rd respondent herein alleging dowry harassment and a case in Cr.No.1l9 of 2023 was registered on the petitioner and his family members were also roped into the said case. Later, 3rcl respondent filed charge sheet before the Court of II Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Kothagudem vide C.C.No.402 of 2024 showing his son D. Ravi Kiran (A-1) as absconding as he is in Australia on account of his employment. Petitioner now submits that his son/A- 1 is likely to visit India for settlement of the case but, NBW was pending against his son and he is apprehending that 2nd and 4th respondents at the behest of Sth respondent may obstruct/ prevent his son at the Airport, and in order to avoid unnecessary torture and mental harassment, petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

¶47

¶48

I I

¶49

A memo has been filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner in which a copy of order passed in Crl.P.No.87lO of 2024 is placed wherein this Court has allowed the Criminal Petition and criminal proceedings against the petitioners/A-2 and A-3 in C.C.No.402 of 2024 on the file of the Court of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Kothagudem are quashed. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that A-2 and A-3 in the said crime are none other than the petitioner herein and his wife. It is lurther submitted that now the C.C.No.4O2 of 2024 on the hle of the Court of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate oi First Class at Kothagudem is posted on 04.02.2026 and the petitioner would like to represent his case on the next date of hearing.

¶50

In the writ petition material papers, a copy of the LOC Proceedings dated 14.11.2023 issued by the Bureau of Immigration, (Ministry of Home Affairs), Government of India was placed, wherein LOC was opened at the request of the 4fr respondent.

¶51

In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of suspending the LOC dated 14.11.2023 opened by the 2"d respondent against the son of the petitioner i.e., rRavikiran Dharmarajula (A-1 in Crime No. 1 19 of 2023 of Kothagudem III Torvn Police Station) from 25.01-2026 to 15.02.2026. It is made clear that the LOC issued against the petitioner's son is suspended from 25.01.2 026 to 15.02.2026 subject to the condition that the petitioner,s son shal1 surrender his passport before the trial Court/Court of the II Additional

¶52

¶53

Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Kothagudem immediately after entering India and for further travel from India the petitioner's son has to take permission from the trial Court/Court of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Kothagudem.

¶54

With these observations, writ petition is disposed of. No order

¶55

as to costs-

¶56

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

¶57

SD/.A.V.S.PRASAD DEPUTY REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY'

SECTION OFFICER

The Principal Secretary, Home Department, State of Telangana, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

¶62

The Under Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Bureau of lmmigration, Union of lndia, New Delhi

¶63

The Station House Officer, lll-Town, Kothagudem PS, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶64

The Superintendent of Police, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

¶65

One CC to SRI VEMPATI MALLIKARJUN SHASTRY, Advocate [OPUC]

¶66

Two CCs to GP for Home, High Court for the State of^Telanganaat Hyderabad. [OUTj

¶67

One CC to SRI N. BHUJANGA^{RAO, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia} loPUCl

¶68

Two CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED:1811212025

1 HE SIA
.oY.
4
o
() 0 7 [[B <br>.//
* J.
-r-ll
ORDER

¶74

WP.No.38082 of 2025

¶75

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS o- trJ 7 I 2l>c'

Dharmarajula Venkateswara Rao, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dharmarajula Venkateswara Rao, 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

Sri Kodudula Naveen Reddy Vs The State of Telangana