IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL WRIT PETITION No.5975 of 2026 DATE OF ORDER: 25.02.2026 Between:

Mogapatti Greeshma ...Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, 5th floor, A Block, Telangana Secretariat, Hyderabad, Telangana – 500 003 and others.

...Respondents

ORDER :

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief:

“…to issue order direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of MANDAMUS declaring the action of respondent No.4 and respondent No.5 calling the petitioner to Police Station without informing the reason or issuing any notice as illegal, arbitrary, malafide, contrary to Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently direct respondent Nos.4 and 5 not to harass the petitioner to come to Police Station in the interests of justice and pass...”

2. Heard Ms.P.M.Swapna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and perused the record.

3. The facts of the case in brief as stated are that petitioner has received a phone call from Mob.No.8247879221 on 22.02.2026 claiming that he was calling from KPHB Police Station and asked the petitioner to come to the said Police Station on the same day without mentioning any reasons. The petitioner, however, requested for two days time due to her professional commitments. Subsequently, the petitioner shifted to her parents place as she felt unsafe in her own home. After enquiry, the petitioner came to know that the said person who called the petitioner was the Head Constable at KPHB Police Station. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that Section 179(1) of BNSS exempts women from attending Police Station.

Section 179(1) of BNSS is reproduced herein for ready reference:

"179. (1) Any police officer making an investigation under this Chapter may, by order in writing, require the attendance before himself of any person being within the limits of his own or any adjoining station who, from the information given or otherwise, appears to be acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case; and such person shall attend as so required:

Provided that no male person under the age of fifteen years or above the age of sixty years or a woman or a mentally or physically disabled person or a person with acute illness shall be required to attend at any place other than the place in which such person resides: Provided further that if such person is willing to attend the police station or at any other place within the limits of such police station, such person may be permitted so to do."

4. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner would further rely on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that instead of direct arrest, Police are bound to issue Section 41(A) Cr.P.C. notice in the applicable cases. The main

grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent Police have neither issued any notice nor followed due procedure as laid down under law. Questioning the same, the present writ petition is filed.

5. Mr.M.Srinivas, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that respondent Police had never called and asked the petitioner to come to the said Police Station and accordingly denied the allegations made by the petitioner and prayed this Court to pass appropriate orders to that effect.

6. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and upon perusing the material available on record, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the respondent-authorities not to resort to any illegal action against the petitioners on the pretext of conducting investigation, including by requiring them to wait for long hours at the police station, except b