Dismissed¶50

Shri Masade Lakshmi Narayana, S/o. Shri Bapu, v. The State of Telangana rep. by Home Department, Secretariat

Telangana HC26 Aug 2025WP/7753/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Telangana High Court writ petition (WP No.7753 of 2017) dismissed as infructuous: petitioner sought mandamus directions to arrest private respondents Nos.5 to 12 and investigate Crime No.202 of 2016 after police failed to act; final report already filed 24.01.2017 at XVII ACMM Hyderabad opining lack of evidence; rights reserved to seek other remedies under law. Justice N. Tukaramji, 26 August 2025.

What did the court decide?

Since the crime was investigated and a final report was filed on 24.01.2017 before the XVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, opining lack of evidence, the cause raised in the petition does not survive for adjudication. ¶47

Shri Masade Lakshmi Narayana, S/o. Shri Bapu, Vs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

132171

¶3

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

¶4

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST

¶5

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶8

WRIT PETITION NO: 7753 OF 2017

¶9

Between:

¶10

Shri Masade Lakshmi Narayana, S/o. Shri Bapu,, Occ Reporter, Express TV, H,No.8-3-228, Jawahar Nagar, Yousufguda, Hyderabad-500045, Telangana State.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

1 The State of Telangana rep. by Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad

¶14

2 The Commissioner of Police Hyderabad., -

¶15

3 The Asst. Commissioner of Police Banjara Hills Division,, Hyderabad

¶16

4 The Station House Officer Jubilee Hills Police Station,, , Hyderabad

¶17

Kavitha, Wo.11-228 Varsha nagar colony Visakhapatnam Saligramapuram Visakhapatnam-24.

¶18

6 Ram Mohan Rao, R/o.1^'1 -228 Varsha nagar colony Visakhapatnam Saligramapuram Visakhapatnam-24.

¶19

Kathayani, No.11-228 Varsha nagar colony Visakhapatnam Saligramapuram Visakhapatnam-24.

¶20

.Kalyani, No.11-228 Varsha nagar colony Visakhapatnam Saligramapuram Visakhapatnam-24.

¶21

9- Bhaskar Rao, Ryo.11-228 Varsha nagar colony Visakhapatnam Saligramapuram Visakhapatnam-24-

¶22

Srinivas, No.11-228 Varsha nagar colony Visakhapatnam Saligramapuram Visakhapatnam-24.

¶23

11.Vliaya Mohan Rao, No.11-228 Varsha nagar colony Visakhapatnam Saligramapuram Visakhapatnam-24.

¶24

12.Jagan Mohan Rao, No.11-228 Varsha nagar colony Visakhapatnam Saligramapuram Visakhapatnam-24.

¶25

..RESPONDENTS

¶26

<br>

¶27

^,-^..^:u,,,,o, under Article 226 of the Conslitution r rn J I pravins rhat in the ;"#'il::1;::1,1".,.i: "nio,,^rir]J tr,'"fiil' tn' tish court maY be writ or MANDATT. o"o.1i,]^"t''o'"" ,.n" ;l;: rne in the nature of arresrins and non-conduc,,l'nn 'n"^action of ;:";::''"'"' lts 2 to 4 in nonconsequen,y direct the ,"]'^:t:'"''"",',,"r'r.esponc€ invesrisate rhe maer, , ,^"T",:rt""J,:," ;;; 1".,;j, ;::f? ,:'';;t"";;

¶28

A. NO:1OF2 017 WP tr4P.No:9s67

¶29

F 20 17

¶30

Pe tition under Section 1S l Cp( the affida vit rired in support that in the circtrr rsrances srated in direct the ";^;;:.::"'"s ,i" Hish court rr ry be preased ro matter. Respondenrs ;; ";".;:r:":::: respondents S to 12 ar J investigate the

¶31

Counsel for the petitioner : S

¶32

counser for the Respond"no*' "'RASTRAPAL

¶33

counser for the Respond"n,", 'o'"oo : sRl R'LAXMIKANTH REDDy,l Gp FoR HoME

¶34

The Court made the following: OROER

¶35

¶36

t I

¶37

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶38

WRIT PETITION No.7753 OF 2017

¶39

ORDER:

¶40

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of lndia

¶41

seeking the following relief:

¶42

"...ro lssue a writ or order more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the action of the respondents No.2 to 4 in non-anesting and non-conducting proper investigation as illegat, arbitrary unjust and consequently direct the respondents to anest the Respondenls No.5 to 12 and investigate the matter in lhe interest of justice to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Couft may deems fit^just and proper in the circumstances of the case . . .."

¶43

Heard Mr.Ch.Rastrapal, learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶44

Mr.R.Laxmikanth Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home

¶45

appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

¶46

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the respondent Nos.2 to 4 failed to take proper action in Crime No.202 of 2016 and as there was no proper investigation, this petition was filed for necessary directions.

¶47

Learned Government Pleader for Home would submit that the crime was investigated by the respondents/police and final report was filed on 24.01 .2017 on the file of XVll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, and opining 'ta* of evidence'. Thus, the contest raised by the petitioner does not survive for adjudication.

¶48

I have perused the materials on record-

¶49

¶50

Having regard to the submissions of both the learr ld counser, as the cause raised in this petition does not survive, reservirl the rights of the petitioner to avair appropriate remedies avairabre unde- aw, if any cause still survives, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous No costs.

¶51

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stancl losed.

¶52

sd/.' .$RiNrvASA REDDv//rRUEcoPY//^{AS?:laIIlEglsmAR}

¶53

\EcrloN^oFFlcER \

¶54

To, One CC to SRI CH.RASTRAPAL, Advocate [OPUC] i

¶55