WP/16889/2026 of Gatla Vijay Kumar Vs The State of Telangana on 29 May 2026

1. The state of rerangana, represented by its principar secretary, Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, HyderaOaO. 2' The Commissioner of Police, Nizamabad, Nizamabad proper and District. 3' The Station House officer, Bheemgal Police Station, Bheemgal, Nizamabad District.

4. The circle lnspector of porice, Bheemgar, Bheemgar, Nizamabad District.

5. Dharani Kota shankar, s/o. Narayana, Age. 4g years, occ. Business, R/o. Puranipet By pass Road, Babapur viiragL, Bheemgar Mandar, Nizamabad Proper and District. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue an order or direction more particutarly one in the nature of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ declaring the action of the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 in calling the petitioner to the police station and threatening him to get setle the issues with the respondent No. 5 as per his dictates, othenruise the petitioner has to face dire consequences is nothing but depriving the personat liberties and also arbitrary, illegal, null and void and violative of principles of naturaljustice and also viotative of Articles 14, 1g and 21 of the Constitution of lndia. respondent Nos. 3 and 4 not to calr the petitioner to the threaten and pressurize him to get setile the issues with the l.A. NO: 1 OF 2026 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 respondent No s' 3 and 4 not to call the petitioner to the police station and not to threaten and pressurize him to get settle the issues with the respondent No. 5. Counsel for the petitioner: SRt. K VENUMADHAV Counsel for the Respondents No 1To 4: Gp FOR HOME Counsel for the Respondent No.S: _-- The Court made the foilowing: ORDER Consequently direct the police station and not to respondent No. S

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRIT PETITION No.16889 of 2O26 DATE: 29.05.2o26 Between: Gatla VUay Kumar Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretar5r, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad & four others Respondents olifttsliE This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:- "...to declare the action of the respondent Nos.3 and 4 in calling the petitioner to the police station and threatening him to get settle the is.sues with the respondent No.5 as per his dictates, otherwise the petitioner has toface dire consequences i.s nothing but depriving lhe personul liherlie.s and also urbitrur.y,, illegul, null and void and violative of principles oJ' natural ju.stice and also violative of Articles 14, l9 and 2l of the L'on:;titution of India. Consequently direct the respondent Nos.3 and .l not to call the petitioner to lhe police station and not to threaten and pressurize him to get settle the is.sues u,ith Ihe responclent No.5... "

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent Nos.1 't to 4. Perused the record

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that, without there being any cognizable offence committed by the petitioner, the respondents-police authorities are repeatedly calting the petitioner to the police station and are threatening the petitioner to settle the dispute with respondent No.5. 4 ' on the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home on instructions would submit that on the complaint received from one Majjathi Raghuram, a case in Crime No.1O9 of 2024 d,ated.22.05.2024 was registered under sections 42O, 468,506 read with 34 IpC against the petitioner. During the course of investigation a notice dated, 20.06.2024, under Section 4l(A) Cr.p.C was issued to the petitioner and for the purpose of investigation, the respondents-police authorities had called the petitioner to the police station and instead of cooperating with the investigation, the petitioner had filed the present writ petition. It is further submitted that the respondents-police authorities are not threatening the petitioner to settle the dispute with the respondent No.5.

5. Having regard to the submissions made and considering the fact that the offences alleged are punishable with imprisonment below seven years, the respondent authorities

To, are 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,I973l and also the guidelines laid down by the Honble Supreme Court in Antesh Kumar a. Stqte of Blha;rr. It is further observed that the respondent authorities sha-ll 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. A' A- SD/-HUSSAIN ALI ;SISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE CO SECTION OFFICER

1. The Principal Secretary, Home Department, State of Telangana, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad. i

2. The Commissioner of Police, Nizamabad, Nizamabad Proper and District. i'

3. The Station House Officer, Bheemgal Police Station, Bheemgal, Nizamabad District.

4. The Circle lnspector of Police, Bheemgal, Bheemgal, Nizamabad District.

5. One CC to SRl. K VENUMADHAV Advocate tOpUCl

6. Two ccs to GP FoR HOME, High court for the state of rerangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

7. Two CD Copies ' (zot+18 scc 273 w i L

HIGH COURT DATED: 2910512026

ORDER

WP.No.16889 of 2026 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS lat VACATION COURT ,.,r'{* :e ,.,..r1 ,,,(?.: a^ ci-, 'l \S E -,7 v * o t!s :? s I\ H od b @