SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 49539

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN
Mohammed Kausar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
WP 19716/2025



THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.19716 of 2025

ORAL ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home.

2. Petitioner is a resident of Borabanda, Hyderabad. Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Borabanda Police Station, called the petitioner to police station on 21.06.2025, 29.06.2025 and 30.06.2025 through mobile No.8712581361 and harassed him by making him to sit in the police station till evening without following due procedure laid down under law. Challenging the said action of respondent No.3, petitioner filed the present writ petition.

3. Whereas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on instructions, would submit that Mr.Mohd Shareef, Mr.Mohd Imroz Khan and Mrs.Gousiya Begum have lodged a complaint against the petitioner on 30.06.2025 stating that at the request made by the petitioner, they have invested amounts in the business of the petitioner. Petitioner has cheated them. On receipt of the said complaint, respondent No.3 has made entry in General Diary and for the purpose of enquiry, he called the petitioner to the Police Station. On completion of investigation, respondent No.3 has closed the said complaint treating the same as ‘civil in nature’. The said vide fact was also informed to the complainants notice to intimation dated 08.07.2025. He has also produced the copy of the same and it was placed on record. Except conducting enquiry, respondent No.3 never harassed the petitioner as alleged in the writ petition.

4. In the light of the said submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondent No.3 not to interfere with the civil disputes between the petitioner and the aforesaid three persons without following the procedure laid down under law. However, this order will not preclude respondent No.3 to take action against the petitioner strictly in accordance with law, on receipt of any complaint.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J

th

10 JULY, 2025.

Ynk

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top