Rajesh Reddy Boreddygari vs The State Of Telangana on 27 May, 2026

    0
    27
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Telangana High Court

    Rajesh Reddy Boreddygari vs The State Of Telangana on 27 May, 2026

    IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
                    AT HYDERABAD
    
     THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO
    
                      WRIT PETITION No.16948 of 2026
    
                                  DATE: 27.05.2026
    
    
    Between:
    
    Rajesh Reddy Boreddygari, S/o. Ramachandra Reddy,
    Aged about 38 years, Occ: Pvt Employee, Permanent R/o.H.No.4-402,
    Plot No.50, NTR Nagar, Suraram Colony, Jeedimetla, Hyderabad,
    Medchal Malkajgiri Division - 500055.
    
    Presently residing at 11965 Triple Crown Dr.Parker Colorado, USA-
    80134. Rep. by his SPA Holder Sri. Boreddygari Harish Reddy,
    S/o.B. Ramachandra Reddy, Aged about 35 years, Occ:Pvt. Employee,
    R/o.H.No.4-402, Plot No.50, NTR Nagar, Suraram Colony, Jeedimetla,
    Hyderabad, Medchal Malkajgiri District- 500055
                                                           ...Petitioner
                and
    
    The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
    Home Department, Secretariat Buildings, Hyderabad and 4 others..
    
                                                                        ...Respondents
    
                                        ORDER
    

    The present Writ Petition is filed seeking to grant the

    following relief:

    SPONSORED

    “…to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the
    nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondent No.2 to 4 in
    initiating the LOC (Look Out Circular) against the petitioner in C.C.No.2264 of
    2019 on the file of the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad
    2
    SCR,J
    W.P.No.16948 of 2026

    at Manoranjan Complex, as being illegal, contrary to law, violative of Articles 21
    of the Constitution of India and pass such other order or orders as this Court may
    deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

    2. Heard Mr.G.Eshwaraiah, learned Counsel for the petitioner

    and Mr.Mahesh Raje, learned Government Pleader for Home

    representing respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Mr.Mohd. Abdul Mateen

    Qureshi, representing learned Deputy Solicitor General of India

    Mr.J.Bhujanga Rao for Central Government for respondent No.4.

    Perused the record.

    3. The brief facts of the case are that, Smt. Patnala Shilpa, wife

    of the petitioner, who is arrayed as respondent No.5 in the present

    writ petition, lodged a complaint in Cr.No.709 of 2018 on the file of

    the Women Police Station, CCS, Hyderabad, which was registered for

    the offences under Sections 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and

    Section 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, which is culminated into

    C.C.No.2264 of 2019 on the file of learned XIII Additional Chief

    Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, and the petitioner is arrayed as

    accused No.1 in the said case.

    4. It is the case of the petitioner that a Look Out Circular (LOC) was

    issued due to issuance of Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) passed by the
    3
    SCR,J
    W.P.No.16948 of 2026

    XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and the said

    LOC was issued without following due process of law, besides violative

    of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

    5. The main grievance of the petitioner is that, his father expired on

    26.05.2026 and previously also, the petitioner tried to come to India to

    see his ailing father, but due to several factors and LOC issued, he could

    not visit India. Further, to perform last rites of his father, he intends to

    come to India and reaching India tomorrow morning i.e., on 28.05.2026

    at Hyderabad.

    6. Learned Government Pleader for Home contended that the

    petitioner has not been appearing before the competent Criminal Court

    from 2019 and previously also warrant issued against him, which was

    recalled and subsequently, the trial Court directed him to appear before

    the Court, but he has not appeared, therefore, Non Bailable Warrants are

    issued by the learned XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,

    Hyderabad.

    7. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, since the

    father of the petitioner expired and it is the primary responsibility of

    every son to perform last rites of his father. In that view of the matter,

    learned Government Pleader for Home Mr.Mahesh Raje for respondent
    4
    SCR,J
    W.P.No.16948 of 2026

    Nos.1 to 3 along with Mr.Mohd. Abdul Mateen Qureshi, learned

    Standing Counsel for respondent No.4 fairly concedes and submits that

    in these circumstances of the case, the petitioner may be allowed to

    come to India to perform last rite of his father by imposing certain

    conditions for his appearance before the trial Court and also to co-

    operate with the trial.

    8. In these circumstances stated, the LOC issued against the

    petitioner in respect of C.C.No.2264 of 2019 of the file of learned XIII

    Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, is hereby

    suspended for a period of 12 days from today, subject to the petitioner

    depositing original Passport before the Women Police Station,

    Basheerbagh on the date of his arrival in person or through his next

    friend, respondent No.3 shall receive the original Passport and issue

    endorsement of receipt of the same and transmit the said original

    Passport to the concerned Court, failing to deposit the Passport, the LOC

    can be given effect to.

    9. After completion of last rites of his father, the petitioner is

    directed to approach the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,

    Hyderabad, for filing an application under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C, for

    recall of warrant pending against him in the said Calendar Case, and also
    5
    SCR,J
    W.P.No.16948 of 2026

    seek for appropriate direction for return of his Passport along with

    application to travel back to USA if he intends to do so. The said

    application shall be dealt with by the learned Magistrate on merits

    strictly in accordance with law, ensuring the presence of the petitioner in

    the said case.

    9. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

    There shall be no order as to costs.

    Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand

    closed.

    _______________________________
    SUDDALA CHALAPATHI RAO, J
    Date:27.05.2026.

    Note:

    Issue CC today
    B/o
    KRL



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here