Dismissed¶35

Mrs.M.Radha Naidu, Hyd v. Prl Secy to Home Dept, Hyd and 8 Others

Telangana HC2 Sept 2025WP/6664/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition 6664 of 2014, High Court for the State of Telangana, disposed 02-09-2025 by Vakiti Ramakrishna Reddy, J.; dismissed as infructuous on counsel's submission that cause of action does not survive; no costs; pending miscellaneous petitions (incl. WPMP 8253 of 2014 under S.151 CPC) closed; subject-matter was alleged police inaction (respondents 2-5) into 1992 murder of petitioner's husband, sought investigation and CB-CID entrustment under Article 226; references to IPC and GRPC principles; no precedent discussed; no quantum.

What did the court decide?

On learned counsel for the petitioner's submission that the cause of action does not survive in the writ petition, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous, with no order as to costs. ¶35

Mrs.M.Radha Naidu, Hyd Vs Prl Secy to Home Dept… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[^3,t861

¶2

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

¶3

(SPecia! Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

TUESDAY, THE SECOND^{DAY OF SEPTEMBER} TWO THOUSAND^{ANDTWENryFIVE}

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE VAKITI RAMAKRISHNA REDDY}

¶7

WRIT PETITI ON NO:^{6664 oF 2014}

¶8

Between:

¶9

Mrs. M. Radha^{Naidu, Wo. Late M. AravindKumar Naidu,Aged59years'} 6ii:^{"'i+'ffiftli,'-ilo-.Ftot-No-804,Moshal Apts,Deccan Towers'} Basheerbagh, Flydeabad. ...'ET.TIONER

¶10

...'ET.TIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

The Govt. of A.P.,^{rep by its Principal Secretaryto Home Depar'tment'} Secrctariat Buildings,^HYderabad-

¶13

i#' 6iteA;^{diine-raiof pqticelAndhJa Prad esh,Hvderabad'}

¶14

The Commissioner^{of Police, Hyderabad-}

¶15

;: tffi x;ii:ffii'6riilmiisionei^{of-Police, Naravanguda,} llv9gtlPl9'

¶16

::llii"'"19"[*am$i"';lgi.'If^{['*d-'61s,18x3f,} 'b:YRE:'ift^oz-r+ - .lirieetoet Bibi Nadar, Nalgonda District-soB-126 -

¶17

.lirieetoet Bibi Nadar, Nalgonda District-soB-126 -

¶18

?. b:ffi;6;ii'(ri;;;57;,.^{L;iE Pv;nkatesam' occ:Business'F/o' 43-c'} , ftsS[:l"s:'l'd,-i3#:dnffi3;fJlft!,1331"cc:^{Ni,, R/o H N o 1'3ootN2,} Street 1.1o.13, Ashok^{Nagar, Hyderabad'}

¶19

e. iii;-lid;is6it'c'iiipuniei,^{cilMccircte vl, Abids, Hvderabad'}

¶20

(wP Stands dismissed^{for defaultas againstR8 for Non Complianceof} c.o. De {6108/2017)

¶21

...RESPONDENTS

¶22

Petition under^{Article226 ot lhe constitution of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated^{in the affidavitfiled therewith'the High Court maybe} pleasedtoissueawritorordermoreparticularlyoneinthenatureofwritof mandamusdeclaringtheactionoftherespondents2to5innotprobingintothe petitioner husband murder^{case who has murdered on 1 2S-1992 within the} jurisdiction of Sth respondent^{as illegal, arbitrary' unjust and also against the} principles of IPC and as well as GRPC and^{consequentialdirections to the} respondents2toStomakethoroughinvestigationinrespectofpetitionerhusband murder case and^{initiate criminal action againstthe respondents 6 to 8 and further} declaration that^{the matter maybe entrusted to CB CID Department'}

¶23

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2014(WPMF.^{NO: 8253 OF 2014)}

¶24

petition under-section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances^{statedin the} affidavit filed^{in support of the petition, the HighCourt may be pleased to direct the} respondents ll^{to 5 to make thorough investigation in respectof petitioner husband} murder case^{:rnd initiatecriminalactionagainstthe respondents 6 to 8 and furtherr} dectaration that^{the matter may be entrustedto CB CID Department pending} disposal of th,a^{above writ petition.}

¶25

COUNSEI fOr thE^{PEtitiONET:SRI V. BRAHMAIAH CHOWDARY}

¶26

Counsel for the^{RespondentNo. 1 to 5: GP FOR HOME}

¶27

Counsel for the^{RespondentNo. 6 to 8:} '-

¶28

Counselfor the^{RespondentNo.9: SC FOR GHMC}

¶29

The Court made^{the following: ORDER}

¶30

¶31

HONOI'RABLE^{SRI JT'STICE VAIilTI RAilIAKRISHNA REDDY} WRIT PEIITION^{No'6664 of 2O14}

¶32

ORDER:

¶33

sri v.Bratrmaiatr^{chowda4r,learned counsel on record for} the petitioner^{submitted that the cause of actiondoes not} survive in this^{Writ Petition.}

¶34

¶35

In view of^{the above submission,the writ Petition is} dismissed as^{infruchrous.There shall be no order as to costs'}

¶36

As a sequel,^{the miscellaneouspetitions pending'if any'} shall stand closed.

¶37

SD'.AHMED^{ABDULLAHKHAN'} --'''AistsrANr REGISTRAR 6

,/TRUE^COPY//

SECTION^OFFICER

TO. ' ..rrrAr^rr^r-.rrrrtrrnaPv AdvocatetOPUCl 1 . One CC to^{SRI V.} EB .UI'IAIAH^{CHOWD^RY' Advocate [OPUC]} 2. rwo ccs^{to-bi Fdt H.ryle, iiig;'b--"Laj;r1neslateoi rbtangana'tourl} 3. one cc^{to sd FoR'GiiMC' Ao'5cate [oPuc]}

¶43