Telangana High Court
Kasula Narasimah vs The State Of Telangana on 2 April, 2025
THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
AND
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA
WRIT APPEAL No.787 of 2024
JUDGMENT (Per the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Sujoy Paul):
Sri G.L. Narasimha Rao, learned counsel for the
appellants and Sri Mahesh Raje, learned Government Pleader for
Home, for respondent Nos.1 to 6.
2. This intra-court appeal assails the order dated
25.04.2024 passed by a learned Single Judge in W.P.No.9940 of
2024.
3. The principal prayer of the appellants before the writ
Court was regarding non-consideration of their representation
dated 14.02.2024.
4. Learned Government Pleader for Home informed that the
offence has been registered against the persons whose names
were referred in the aforesaid representation and even charge
sheet has also been filed.
5. Learned Single Judge has examined the matter and
recorded the following findings:
"2. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for
Home, on the basis of the written instructions,
submitted that on the complaint of the petitioner
No.1 dated 10.03.2024 to the respondent No.6
enquiry was conducted. As the allegations in the
said complaint were non-cognizable in nature, the
respondent No.6 took permission from the Judicial
First Class Magistrate, Ramannapet and registered
FIR.No.128 of 2024 for the offences punishable
under Sections 290, 323 and 506 read with Section
34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, against Kasula
Venkanna and Kasula Anasuya and the case is
under investigation.
3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader
for Home further stated that the petitioner shall
produce Court order for extending necessary police
protection and without Court order, police
protection cannot be given.
4. Copy of the written instructions along
with FIR.No.128 of 2024 is served on the learned
counsel for the petitioners.
5. As it is stated that investigation in
FIR.No.128 of 2024 is being undertaken, this Court
is not inclined to pass any order and the writ
petition is closed. However, the respondent No.6 is
directed to ensure that respondents No.7 to 18 and
accused persons in FIR.No.128 of 2024 do not take
law into their hands and complete the investigation
as expeditiously as possible."
6. Learned Single Judge, while passing the impugned order,
has considered the provisions of criminal law and in this view of
the matter, this intra-court appeal is not maintainable.
7. The Supreme Court in Ram Kishan Fauji v. State of
Haryana 1, opined that the writ appeal/letters patent appeal is
not maintainable against the order of the writ court when it
1 (2017) 5 SCC 533
examined a criminal matter. The similar view was followed by
the High Court for the State of Telangana in State of Telangana
v. Tushar Vellapally 2 and the Gauhati High Court in Deba
Prasad Dutta v. State of Assam 3.
8. Accordingly, this Writ Appeal is disposed of by reserving
the liberty to the appellants to file appropriate proceedings. No
order as to costs.
Interlocutory applications, if any pending, shall also
stand closed.
___________________
SUJOY PAUL, ACJ
____________________
RENUKA YARA, J
Date: 02.04.2025
Myk/Tsr
2 2023 SCC OnLine TS 334
3 2023 SCC OnLine Gau 3615: AIR 2024 Gau 30
