Telangana High Court
WP/16910/2026 of S. Manikya Reddy 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 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO WRIT ITION NO: 16910 oF 2026 Between S. Manikya Reddy, S/o Narayana Reddy Aged about
\\
[ 3485 I
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
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
WRIT
ITION NO: 16910 oF 2026
Between
S. Manikya Reddy, S/o Narayana Reddy Aged about 53 years, Occ R/o H.No.12-85, lndira Nagar Colony, BHEL Towship, Ramachandrapuram, Sangareddy, Hyderabad SO2O32.
...PETITIONER
AND
1. The state of relangana, Rep by its Principal secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat, Hyderabad.
2. The Station House Officer, Banjara Hills Police Station.
3. Kadirgary Narsimha Reddy, s/o Late K. Narayan Reddy Aged about 5s years, occ Business R/o H.No.3-95, Manchirevura, Gandipet Mandal, Ranga Reddy 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 appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of Respondent No. 2 in harassing, threatening, summoning to Police Station and illegally interfering with the life and liberty of the Petitioner, without there being any complaint as against the Petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of lndia and consequently, direct the Respondents No.2 not to harass, threaten and summon the Petitioner without following due process of law.
t.A. NO:
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 Business, Tellapur, Respondents No.2 not to harass, threaten and summon the petitioner without following due process of law, pending disposal of the present writ.
Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. L.VANI
Counsel for the Respondent Nos.l & 2: AGp FOR HOME
Counsel for the Respondent No.3: --
The Court made the following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT
HYDTiRABAT)
THE HONO
E SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA
ATHI RAO
WRIT PETITION No.169I0 of 2026
29th MAY,2026
Between:
Mr.S Manikya Reddy, S/o. Narayana Reddy, Aged about 53 years. Occ: Business.
R/o.H.No. 12-85, lndira Nagar Colony'"
BHEL Towship, Tellapur" Rarnachandrapuram.
Sangareddy, Hyderabad - 502 032.
and
The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat, Hyderabad and 2 others .Petitioner
...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 Illed seeking the following relief: "...to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.2 in harassing, threatening, summoning to Police Station and illegally interfering with the life and liberty of the petitioner, without there being any complaint as against the petitioner as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14, 19 and 2l of the Constitution of India and consequently, direct the respondent No.2 not to harass threaten and summon the petitioner without following due process of law and pass such other order(s) as this Court may deemfit and proper in the interest ofiustice."
)
2. Heard Ms.L.Vani, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.l and2. Perused the record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that a civil dispute existed between the petitioner and respondent No.3 and that the respondent-police has no authority to interfere in civil disputes unless directed by a competent Court. It is further contended that the respondent- police are highhandedly harassing, threatening and summoning the petitioner to the Police Station despite there being no complaint against the petitioner.
4. Per contra, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submitted that a complaint has been received from respondent No.3 and that the petitioner is being summoned only for the purpose of investigation.
5. Taking into consideration of the rival submissions and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court deemed it appropriate to direct the petitioner to appear before the Investigating officer on or before 28.06.2026 between I l: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 Segigr 4l-A of the Code of Criminal procedure, J iIiiI lg73) as well as the guidetines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihart .
6. This Court further directs that the petitioner shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer by furnishing intbrmation and producing all relevant documents/material required for the purpose of investigation. The Investigating Officer is directed to consider the same and complete the investigation strictly in accordance with law
7. Accordi4gly, the writ Petition was disposed of. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed r lzot+1 I scc 273 SD'.A. SREENIVASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /TRUE GOPY/ ,a(? SECTION OFFICER to ,,. The principal secretary, Department of Home, secretariat' Hyderabad' state of Telangana. 2'TheStation.Ho,,"officer,Banjara-HillsPoliceStation.
3. One CC to Ms. L'VANI, Advocate [OPUC]
4. Two ccs to Gp FOR HoM;li'gn-c6urt for the state of Telangana' at
PSK. BS Hyderabad. [OUT] Two CD CoPies
{ HIGH COURT DATED: 29tOSt2OZ6
ORDER
WP.No.16910 of 2026 VACATTON COURT (e rlE s 14 i )
,,, [6 ]:l ?!t6 -hi DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS. I6 ,b '[a6