IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR W.P. No.36417 of 2025 Date: 18.12.2025 Between:

Mohd Rizwan Ilyas … Petitioner And The State of Telangana, Represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and Two others … Respondents

ORDER

Questioning the action of the respondent No.3, Station House Officer, Dabeerpura, in calling the petitioner to the Police Station without issuing any notice under Section 35(3) BNSS, petitioner filed the present writ petition with a consequential prayer to direct the respondent Police not to call the petitioner to the Police station without following due process of law.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondents Police have informed the petitioner that a complaint has been lodged against the petitioner and forced to do as per their instructions or else the petitioner will be implicated in false cases and threatened with dire consequences. Hence, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home has placed a copy of the instructions dated 28.11.2025 of the Station House Officer, Dabeerpura, wherein it is stated that on 15.11.2025 received a petition from the petitioner against one Neha Begum alleging that since 2023, the petitioner has been supporting monetary help for her livelihood and thereafter she started blackmailing to extort huge money from him. Based on the said complaint, entry was made vide Petition No.00639 and took up the enquiry. In the process of enquiry, petitioner was contacted to establish his allegations against Neha Begum and on 17.11.2025 petitioner came to the Police Station and after corroboration with the contents the petitioner was asked to produce any witness or evidence to prove his allegation against Neha Begum and he promised to produce the same within few days. Instead of producing any evidence, petitioner filed the present writ petition with false allegations.

4. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner will produce evidence/information in support of his complaint.

5. In that view of the matter, recording the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and with their consent, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents Police that if the petitioner approaches with the relevant information/evidence, the respondent No.3 shall consider the same and take appropriate action strictly in accordance with law and follow due procedure as contemplated under law before taking any action against the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.

________________________________

JUSTICE N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR Date: 18.12.2025 LSK