THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR

Writ Petition No.32945 of 2025

ORDER:

Heard Sri B. Chandrasen Reddy, learned Senior Counsel

for the petitioners, learned Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Ms. Muvva R.A. Sri Lakshmi, learned counsel for respondent No.6 –HDFC Bank. There is no representation on behalf of respondent No.5 despite service of notice. With their consent, this writ petition is being

taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayer:

“…Declaring the action of the respondent No.3 in issuing notice under Sections 94, 106 of BNSS dated 21.10.2025 in connection to Crime No.27 of 2025 under Sections 318 (4), 316 (2) of BNS & Section 5 of TSPDFE Act, 1999 and a consequential action of respondent No.6 in debit freezing the bank account of the petitioner No.1 firm bearing Account No.50200014387766, HDFC Bank, Serilingampally Branch, as illegal, arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice, violative of Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and against all settled principles of law and consequently set aside the notice under Sections 94, 106 of BNSS dated 21.10.2025 in connection to Crime No.27 of 2025 issued by respondent No.6 forthwith de-freeze the bank account of the petitioner No.1 firm bearing

Account No.50200014387766, HDFC Bank, Serilingamapally Branch …”

3. Facts of the case in brief are that petitioner No.1 is a partnership firm established under the name and style as M/s. Lalitha Constructions and Developers registered under the provision of The Indian Partnership Act, 1932 vide Registration No.2791 of 2014. The petitioner No.2 is the partner of petitioner No.1 firm. The petitioners claim to be the owners and possessors of land admeasuring 11.858 Sq.yards, which includes its share of the land admeasuring to an extent of 5.324 Sq.yards, situated in Sy.No.276, 277, 314/ అ2, 314/ అ3, 314/ అ4, 314/ ఇ1/1, 314/ ఇ1/2, 314/ ఇ1/3, 314/ ఇ1/4, 314 ఇ2 and 315, situated at Ameenpur Village and Municipality & Mandal, Sanga Reddy District, Telangana State (hereinafter referred as “subject property”), having acquired the same through Development Agreement-cum-General Power of Attorney’s with other land owners. The petitioners obtained necessary permissions from Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA) for the construction of a Gated Community Apartment project consisting of 220 flats, vide permission No.038956/SKP/R1/U6/HMDA/10092020. It is further submitted that respondent No.5 is a Private Limited Company engaged in the business of marketing, selling, purchasing and renting self-owned or leased apartments as well as residential and non-residential buildings etc. The petitioners and respondent No.5 entered into a Memorandum of Understanding dated 22.09.2021 for sale of 142 flats admeasuring, 1,83,500 Sq. ft. (including common areas), at a minimum price of Rs.3,800/- per Sq. ft. It is submitted that disputes arouse between the petitioner No.2 and respondent No.5 as respondent No.5 failed to secure buyers for the agreed 142 flats and also defaulted in making payments and the petitioner No.2 terminated the MoU and respondent No.5 was directed to stop all marketing activities, collection of sale consideration and execution of sale agreements. Thereafter, the petitioner issued a legal notice on 25.08.2022 calling upon respondent No.5 to collect commission of Rs.47,51,964/- and upon reconciliation of accounts, petitioner No.2 found that respondent No.5 had wrongfully collected and withheld Rs.61,67,000/- directly from customers making the total defaulted sum of Rs.71,67,000/-. Thereafter, the petitioner No.2 filed a suit on 12.09.2025 to recover the principal sum of Rs.71,67,000/- and the same is pending on the file of the VI Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at Kukatpally. Thereafter, the petitioners came to know that a case was registered in Crime No.27 of 2025 against respondent No.5 for the