Syed Ahmed Vs The State of Telangana And 2 others

The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Burgula Rama Krishna Rao Bhavan, NH 44, Hill Fort. Adarsh Nagar, Hyderabad-63

¶13

2, The Special lnvestigation Team, Chandrayanagutta Police Station, Chndrayanagutta, Hyderabad, Tlangana State.

¶14

P.Veera Reddy, S/o Venkata Narsimha Reddy, aged about 60 years, Occ. RTC Driver Warangal-1 , Depot Staff No,34294914-3-73,Warangal, Warangal District Telangana State

¶15

...RESPONDENTS

¶16

Petition under Article 226 o'( 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 Certiorari and quash the Charge Sheet allegedly filed by the 2nd respondent in C.C.SR.No.12633 of 2019, filed in Crime (FlR) No.105 of 2010 dated 31/03/2010, on the file of the Court of the XIV Additional Chief lvletropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, and the Remand Report dated 1OlO4l201O , as null and void, there is no prima facie case made out against the petitioner, and further direct the respondents to issue NOC Certificate to the petitioner as there is no crime is pending against the petitioner, to enable the petitioner to pursue employment.

¶17

tA 22022

¶18

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 grant stay of all further proceedings in C.C. SR.No.12633of 2019 allegedly filed uy tlte zllu le5pultuell[ ill -rlllE \rlr/ l\u. /Erf)\ rr^ rn E ^t an rr\ ,J^+^.1 or no a.{n ru.J 9l zu lu u€l(cu J l-vJ-zu^r\J dllu ^^.J^{.L^} Urt;

¶19

Remand Report dated 10-04-2010, on the file of the court of the XIV Additional Chief [t4etropolitan lr,4agistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, pending disposal of the above writ petition.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. J. SRI RAMA KRISHNA

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2: GP FOR HOME

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.3: --

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

TIIE IION'BI,E SRI .IT]S'[ICIi.I. SREENIVAS RAO

¶25

WRI'I PE'fl'[ION No.43202 of 2022

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

Wren the matter u,as taken up lor consideration on I 7.09.2025, there was no representation on behalfolthe petitioner, either in physical rurode or virtual urode. To give otre opportunity, the matter was posted to 18.09.2025 under the caption "For Disrnissal".

¶28

Today also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, either in physical niode or^.,,ifiual rnode, though the matter is listed under the caption 'For Dismissal'. lt appears that the petitioner is not having interest in prosecuting the matter. Hence, this Court has no option except to disrniss this petition for non-prosecution.

¶29