Telangana High Court
WP/16936/2026 of Sri, Vaaduka Sridevi Vs The State of Telangana, on 29 May 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTTCE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRIT NNO : 16935 OF 2026 il Sri Vaaduka Sridevi, Wo, Sri, Vaaduka Raja Gopal, Aged
[ 348s 1
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF MAY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTTCE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
WRIT
NNO: 16935 OF 2026
il
Sri Vaaduka Sridevi, Wo, Sri, Vaaduka Raja Gopal, Aged about 54 years, Occ.
Business, R/o. H.No. 8-3-169/50, Siddartha Nagar Vengal RLo Nagar, Hyderabad, Telangana-500033.
...PETITIONER
D
1. The_state of relangana, Rep by its principar secretary, Department of Home, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Telangana State Secretariat, Hydeiabad.
2. The commissioner of Police, cyberabad commissionerate, Gachibowli, Rangareddy.
3. The Deputy Commissioner of police, Madhapur Zone, Rangareddy District,
4. Assistant Commissioner of police, Madhapur, Rangareddybistrict.
5. The Station House officer, Madhapur police Station, Rangareddy District.
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 ol the constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of the Respondent No.5 in repeatedly calling the petitioner to the police station without issuing any notice under law, frequenfly visiting the petitioner's property bearing plot Nos.s6 and s7 situated in survey Nos. l1119, 11120 and 11121 ot Khanamet Village, serilingampally Mandal, GHMC
Madhapur Area, Rangareddy District, and subjecting the petitioner to mental and physical harassment at the instance of private persons, as illegal, arbitrary, high- handed, violative of Articles 14, 1g and 21 of the constitution of lndia and contrary to the procedure established by law, and consequenfly direct the respondents not to interfere with the peacefur possession, enjoyment and business activities of the petitioner except by following due process of law.
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 direct the respondents, particularly Respondent Nos.4 and 5, not to harass the petitioner by repeatedly calling her to the police station without following due process of law, not to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner's property bearing Plot Nos.56 and s7 situated in survey Nos.11l19, 11t2o and 11121 oI
Khanamet Village, serilingampally Mandal, GHMC Madhapur Area, Rangareddy District, and not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner except in accordance with law, pending disposal of the Writ petition.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI D.SATYANARAYANA
Counsel for the Respondents: AGp FOR HOME
The Court made the following: ORDER
\./
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT
HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
WRIT PETITION No.16936 of 2026
29th MAY ,2026
Between
Smt. Vaaduka Sridevi, Wo. Sri. Vaaduka Raja Gopal, Aged about 54 years, Occ: Business, R"/o. H. No. 8-3-169/50, Siddartha Nagar, Vengal Rao Nagar. Hyderabad, Telangana - 500 033.
...Petitioner
and
The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Horne, Dr B R Ambedkar Telangana State Secretariat, Hyderabad and 4 others.
...Respondents
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
The present Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief: "...to issue an appropriate ll/rit, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of lhit o/ Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondenl No.5 in repeatedly calling the petitioner to the police slqtion v,ithout issuing any nolice under lctw, .frequently visiting the petitioner's property bearing Plot Nos.56 and 57 situated in Survc)'No.s'.ll/19, ll/20 and ll/21 of Khanamet Villuge. Se rilingumpally Manclul, GHMC' Madhapur Area, Rungctreddy District, and subjecttng the petitioner to mental and phystcal harassment at the instance of private persons, as illegal, arbitrary, high-handed, violative of Articles I4, I9 and 2I of the Constitution of India and contrary to the procedure established by law, and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the peace.ful possession, enjoyment and business ac'tivitie.s of'the pelitioner excepl by following due process' o/' luu, und pass such other order or orders as this Court deem /it and proper in the circumstances ofthe case."
2. Heard Mr. D. Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondents. Perused the record
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that respondent No.5 is highhandedly harassing, threatening and summoning the petitioner to the Police Station despite there being no commission of any cognizable offence
4. Per contra, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submitted that a complaint has been received and the same was registered as Crime No.730 of 2026 dated 13.05.2026 on the file of Madhapur Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 329(3), 324(4) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and that the petitioner is being summoned only for the purpose of investigation and the police authorities are not interfering with the civil rights of the petitioner.
5. From a perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the allegations alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 329(3),324(4) and 351(2) of BNS and the punishment prescribed for the said offences is less than seven (07) years.
6. In that view of the matter, without going into the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioner to appear before the
Investigating Officer on or before 28.06.2026 between 1 1:00 a.m. and 05:00 p.m. The Investigating Officer is further directed to strictly follow the procedure contemplated under Section 35(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (previously Section 4l-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) as well as the guidelines laid down by the Flon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v, State of Bihart .
7. This Court further directs that the petitioner shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer by turnishing information and producing all relevant documents/material required for the purpose of investigation. The Investigating Officer is directed'to consider the same and complete the ., l !, .tl investigation strictly' i'n'accordance with law.
8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition was disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. (201418 SCC 273 SD'.B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /TRUE COPY// G SECTION OFFICER
1. The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Telangana State Secretariat, Hyderabad, State of Telangana.
2. The Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Gachibowli, Rangareddy.
3. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Madhapur Zone, Rangareddy District,
4. Assistant Commissioner of Police, Madhapur, Rangareddy District.
5. The Station House Officer, Madhapur Police Station, Rangareddy District.
6. One CC to SRI D.SATYANARAYANA, Advocate IOPUC]
7. Two CCs to GP FOR HOtvlE, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad. [OUT]
8. Two CD Copies To I , tj t T)cl7
HIGH COURT DATED: 2910512026 WP.No.16936 of 2026 WITHOUT COSTS. R htE
s ot o t, 0 6 JUil 2025
c: * ,rtf) rc!l I G
l-l -l \l b AL