Telangana High Court
WP/16746/2026 of Razia sultana 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 TWENry NINTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX Between: AND PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRIT PETITION NO: 16746 0F 2 26 ...PETITIONER Razia sultana, Wo Hussain
A[ 3485I
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE TWENry NINTH DAY OF MAY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX
Between:
AND
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
WRIT PETITION NO: 16746 0F 2 26
...PETITIONER
Razia sultana, Wo Hussain basha Rpresented by Ria lmmigration Services Aged 42 years, occBusiness Ria rmmigration services 1-gi42, First Froor, Vidya Nagar, Hyderabad. T.S.
1. The State Of Telangana, Reptd. By its principal secretary Home department Secretariat, Hyderabad.
2' The commissioner of porice, Hyderabad city porice commissionerate Command and Control .Centre Telangana poti6e, RoaO No. 12, Al,"rr;i ^ L"ST, Banjgp Hifls, Hyderabad, Tetaniana SOOOS+
3' lhe station House officer, Nailakunta porice station, Hyderabad, Terangana..
4. J. Viiaya Kumari, Wo..J. y"^.!qt::llr, eged atout'SA y"ars, O.;r"p;ti", Teacher, Resident of H.No.2-2-64 nn,TuuaiNigar, Rmoeriret nvo"i"o-ra -
...RESPONDENTS
Petition under Articre 226 ot the constitution of rndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fired therewith, the High court may be preased to issue any writ, order or direction, more particurarly one in the nature of a writ of Mandamus, decraring the action of Respondent No.3 in repeatedry cafiing the Petitioner and requiring her presence at the porice station, in crime which was registered vide FIR No.119t2026 under sections 318(4) and 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya sanhita in the name of investigation. Respondent No.3 is making repeatedry send sub ordinates , staff ,requiring the petitioner to appear at the police station and is allegedly forcing and pressurizing her to settle the matter financially in connection with the said disputes which is iflegar arbitrary and contrary . consequenfly, it is prayed that this Hon'bre court may be preased to direct Respondent No.3 not to harass the Petitioner to the police station repeatedly at uneven times or require her presence without any basis or without following due process of law, pending disposal of the main writ petition.
l.A. NO: 1OF 2026
petition under section 1s1 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to direct Respondent No.3 not to harass the Petitioner ,to follow the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble supreme court in Arnesh Kumar v. state of Bihar in relation to offences punishable with imprisonment up to seven years, including compliance with clue process pending disposal of the main writ petition, counset for the Petitioner: Ms. Dr. MADHAVT LATHA @ SAARAH sANotLyA
Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1to3: GP FOR HOME
Counsel for the Respondent No.4:-
The Court made the following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
WRIT PETITION No.16
of 2o.26
DATE: 29.o5.20.26
Between:
Razia Sultana
...Petitioner
The state of relangana,
AND
Represented by its Principal Secretary,
Home Department,
Secretariat, Hyderabad & others
...Respondents
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
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:
This Writ Petition is iiled under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:- "...to issue any wril, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of Respondent No.3 in repeatedly calling lhe petitioner and requit'ing her presence at the police station in crime which was registered vide FIR.No. t 19/2026 under Sections 318(4) and 3 l6(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhitha in the name of investigation. Respondent No.3 is making repeatedly send subordinates, staff, requiring the Petitioner to appear ut the polic'e stcttion and is allegedly forcing and prc.ssurizing her lo .scttlc lhe nrultcr.finuncictllv in c'onneclion u,ith tha .stric.l cli.t;pLtta.s vrhic lt is illcurl trrhilrttr)' utrd c'ttnlrury. ('onsequently. it i,s pruvetl thctt thi.s l'htn'hlc Court mcty be pleased to direct Respondent No.3 not lo huruss the Petitioner suntmoning, the police station repeatedly at uneven times or require her presence without any hasis ttr without follov,ing due proce.ss of law, pending disposal oJ'thc main wril petilion, qncl lo pa.ss such olher ctrder or orders .. . "
2. Heard Ms. Dr. Madhavi Latha @ Saarah Sandilya' learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Horne, for respondent Nos'l to 3' Perused the record
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though the petitioner is cooperating with the investigation, Respondent No.3 is repeatedly calling the petitioner to the police station and, allegedly subjecting her to harassment in t-he guise of invesigation in crime No.119 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4) and 316(2) of the Bhar adYaNYaYa Sanhita' 2023'
4. Onfneotherhand,learnedAssistantGovernment pleader would submit that the abover crime is registered against the petitioner and the investigation is in progress' S. Having regatd, to the submissions made and considering the fact that the offences alleged are punishable with imprisonment below seven years, the respondent authorities directed to strictly follow the procedure contemplated are under Section 35(3) ol' the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and also the guidelines laid down by the Honble
Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar t , State of Biharr. It is further observed that the respondent authorities shall not unnecessarily insist upon the presence of the petitioner at the police station at odd hours and shall conduct the investigation strictly in accordance with law
6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any are pending, shall stand closed. (2014) 8 SCC 273 SD/.B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,/TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
1. The Principal secretary Home department Secretariat, Hyderabad.
2. The commissioner of police, Hyderabad City Police Commissionerate Command and Control Centre Telangana Police, Road No. 12, Bhavani Nagar, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, Telangana 500034
3. The Station House Officer, Nallakunta Police Station, Hyderabad, Telangana..
4. One CC to Ms. Dr. MADHAVI LATHA SAARAJ SAMDO;UA Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CCs to GP FOR HOME High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad IOUTI
6. Two CD Copies c To, BM BS I
HIGH COURT DATED: 29lOSt2OZ6
ORDER
WP.No.16t46 of 2026 l+E SI4
t u 0 6 JUli 2026 VACATION COURT - ?
:\, .l (:.'f.,\i{.Sir,"ri..,,,: DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WTHOUT COSTS x o b 6 lat o