CC/4115/2025 of SAG AR DHARA, Vs Government of Telangana State, on 22 January 2026

1. Sagar Dhara, S/o Dr Venkateswarlu Dhara, Age. 73 years, Engineer, R/o E- 303, Highrise Apartments, Hyderabad - 500 080.

2. l. Balamani, Wo l. tVlallikarjuna Sharma, R/o 6-3 12431156, M.S. Makta, Opposite Raj Bhavan, Hyderabad 500 082

3. Udaya Kumar tvladistretty, S/o Veeraiah, Advocate, Age: 69 yrs., 2-2- 113011912 G 1, Prashant Nagar, Shivam Road, Hyderabad - 44 ...Petitioners AND

1. Government of Telangana State, represented by the Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretarrat, Hyderabad 5OO O22

2. Station House Officer,, Danthalapally Police Station, tr4ahabubabad District, Telangana State - 506 324 3: The Superintendent of Police,, Mahabubabad District, T S. - 506 101.

4. The Collector & District Magistrate,, lVlahabubabad District, District collectorate office, IDOC, Irrlahabubabad, LS - 506 101 .

5. Kasireddy Narasimha Reddy, (at 917780789038), son of late Kasireddy Gopala Reddy, Village Pedda Mupparam, Mahabubabad District, Telangana state - 506 324.

6. Danda Janardhan Reddy, djreddy20O5@yahoo.com and h/o lr4s. Haliya, d/o late Kasireddy Gopala Hyderabad 500 036 Son of Ranga Reddy Reddy, Dilsukhnagar, {Respondents Nos. 5 and 6.not necessary parties in ttri ; case} Alleged Contemnors/ RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners : Mr I Mallikarjuna Sharma Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 : Mr swaroopa O:-illa, Special Government Ple : der The Court made the following: ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRIIUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO CONTEMPT CASE NO.4115 OF 2025 DATE:22.01.2026 Between: Sagar Dhara s/o. Dr. Venkateswarlu Dhara, r / o.E-303, Highrise Apartments, Hyderabad and two others. . .. Petitioners and Government of Telangana, rep. by the I'rincipal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and five others. (Respondent Nos.S & 6 are not necessary parties in this contempt case) .... Contemnors/ respondents ORDER: (Per thz Hon'bb Sri lustice Suddah Clmlapathi Rao) Heard Mr. I.Mallikarjuna Sharma, learned counsel for petitioners and Mr. Swaroop Oorilla, learned Special Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

2. The present Contempt Case has been filed urLder Sections 2 & 12 to 16 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 197L and Rule 5 of Contempt of Court (High Court of Andhra Pradesh) Rules 1980, alleging willful and deliberate disobedience and non-compliance with the order passed in W.P.No.16844 ol 2024, dated 08.07.2024. B', rhe said order, this Court directed the official respondent Nos.1 o 4 herein to immediately prepare and dispiay relevant poster n r ices regarding the missing person, Kasireddy Narayana Reddy, in a I I,olice Stations and important public places in the State and to ensur: circulation of the said information through leading news cliannels i r the State and to pass other order(s) as this Court may deem fit ar r . proper in the circumstances of the case

3. 'fhe brief facts leading to filing of the present ( are that- this Court disposed- of W.P.No.16844 of 202a which was filcd for issuance of Writ of Habeas Corpr respondent Nos.'[ to 4 for production of or€ Kasir€ Reddy, who is said to be missing from his house sinc,: that the petitioners in the said writ petition are said activists and the ,,,ve1l-wishers of the missing persor contended that as per the contents of the affidavit, recr to know about the said Kasireddy Narayana Redcl.z silrce July, 2022 i.e., for almost two years now an(l petition for Habeas Corpus in june, 2024. Perusal cl and also the contentions of the writ petitiory woulcl iontempt Case nn n9, n7 )t't)t s directirrg the 1dy Narayana fuly,2022 and o be the social . Fulther, it is ntly they came gone missing filed the writ the pleadings shorv that the respondent Nos.5 and 6 are the brother and brother-in-law of the missing person and that they have lodged a missing complaint so far as missing of Kasireddy Narayana Reddy from July, 2022 ttide missing complaint dated 01.08.2022 and based upon the said missing complaint, which has been lodged on 01.08.2022, an FIR No.89 of 2022 was registered and since then they have been trying to track down the whereabouts of the missing person.

When the writ petition came up for hearing, this Court recorcling the submissions of the learned Government Pleader, as to the written instructions received from the Police authorrties tidc Memo dated 08.07.2024, wherein they have given the details of the steps that they have taken pursuant to the missing complaint. Furtl.rer, the Police authorities have also assurcd the Court tfuough the learned Special Government Pleader that the intensive search of the rnissing person would be continued by taking all necessary steps including that of publishing the photographs of the missing person at all p]rominsnt places and also continuing with the tracking of the nrobile phone of the missing person. Further, it was observed that the fan-rily members can approach the T.V. operators for publishing the photographs of the missing person anci also to take all necessary steps to trace out the missing person, and on assurar :e of the Special Government Pleader that the police shal take ail 1:rther steps for tracing the missing person.

5. Now, the prcsent contempt case is filed : rntending that, though almost around 71/z years lapsed from the r[ .te of the order clated 08.07.2024 passed in \{.p.No.1 6g44 of 2(24, the police authorities lravc not takcn any steps to trace the rruss ng person. lt is further coniendcd tl-rat the1, have failed to prepare 7 clisplay even a single poster containing the photographs of the mi sing person in any Police Statiorr or other prorninent places within t. reir juris<.liction in the State ancl they have also not taken steps for r i .culating about the rnissin6; of the said person in any televisic r channels for publishing news.

6. l-earncd counscl for petitioner contends that t re resporrdent_ police officers are duty-bound to trace the said mir;r ing person by publishing the same in news channels in the state r,r id also to take steps in displaying cven a poster containing photc graphs of the missing person in pursuance of the directions issued lr.-this Court on 08.07.2024. The brief asscrtion of the leamed counsel f :: petitioners is that, no steps have been taken by the respondent-police authorities for tracing the said person as today.

7. Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home would contend that all necessary steps have already been taken and that in the previous order, this Court has also observed that the famity members of missing person, Kasireddy Narayana Reddy' can also approach all the leading news channels for publication of the photograph of the missing person for circulation'

8. In that view of the matter, though a specific assertion has been macle that the respondent-police authorities have violated the order passecl in W.P.No.1 6844 of 2024, in our considered opinion' petitioners have failed to place relevant particulars as to how the respoudents have comrnitted willful disobedience of said order' Further, when a duty was also cast upon the petitioners and the familv members in writ petition to approach the appropriate news channels for circulation of the missing case of Kasireddy Narayana Redcty, and the contempt petitioners, without taking such stePs' now alleged violation of the order passed in W'P.No'16844 of 2024 by the respondent-police authorities. In that view of the matter' in our considerecl view, pursuant to the complaint, FIR No'89/2022 dated ? l \

01.08.2022 was registered as ,Man Missing, and s.l rps were taken pursuant thereof, but the whereabouts of the missir g person is not traceable, as such, there is no willful or deliberate dir;, rbsdisn6. .1 th. order passed by rhis Courr in W.p.No.16g4 4 of 2024 ) eted 0g.07.2024. The Contempt Case is liable to be rejected and accorcii egly closed.

9. It is open to the petitiorers to take steps to circrr ate the news in proPer news channels for tracing out the missing per.r on _ Kasireddy Narayana Reddy a^d police authorities sharl arso tak: a, the possible steps in this regard for tracing the said missing person

10. There shalt [-re no orcler as to costs. pendinl5 miscellaneous applications if anv shall stand closeci. /iTRUE COPYII SD/- K.AMMAJI DE:I ,UTY REGISTRAR .-''Z S ECTION OFFICER To, Sa/PSL 1, Two CCs to the Special Government pleader, High Cc,r rt for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.(OUT) ? 9nu !! !o Sri I IVlailrkarjuna Sharma. Advocate tOpUCl

3. Two CD Copies II

HIGH COURT DATED:22lUnA26

ORDER

CC.No.4115 of 2025 CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE o t3 illR 2ll2fi F ( 1 lHE S 14 r :- J. * * ls.nrc ,-:, &sIa o l*