Thota Rupesh, vs The State Of Telangana,
2025 Latest Caselaw 1635 Tel

Telangana High Court

Thota Rupesh, vs The State Of Telangana, on 7 August, 2025

Author: K. Lakshman

Bench: K. Lakshman

         THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN

                  WRIT PETITION No. 23429 of 2025

ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

Sri G.Aniketh Reddy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for

Home appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 3.

2. The petitioner's father, namely Sri T.Ram Murthy Naidu, is

a convict for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act, 1881. The judgment of the trial Court was

confirmed by both the High Court and the Supreme Court. The

trial Court had imposed a sentence of two years on the petitioner's

father for the said offence. However, the appellate Court modified

the sentence and directed him to pay double the cheque amount.

He failed to pay the said amount. Therefore, he is being kept in

respondent No.3 - Jail. The petitioner's father is 67 years old and

is suffering from multiple irreversible and life-threatening

ailments, as substantiated by medical certificates. These include:

• Cerebrovascular Accident (stroke) in August 2022, resulting in left hemiparesis and neurological deficits. • Double Vessel Coronary Artery Disease, for which he has been declared unfit for surgery by the Regional Medical Board at Gandhi Hospital.

• Chronic Diabetes Mellitus, Hypertension, and Hypothyroidism, all requiring constant medical care.

• He is entirely wheelchair-bound, fully dependent, and unable to perform daily activities independently.

3. The petitioner's father has submitted a representation dated

03.07.2025 to respondent No.3, with a request to consider his case

under Section 4 the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 (hereinafter

referred to as 'the Act'), and release him on probation of good

conduct. Despite receiving and acknowledging the said

representation, respondent No.3 did not act upon the same.

Aggrieved by the said inaction of respondent No.3, the petitioner

filed the present writ petition.

4. Whereas, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for

Home, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner's father has

filed a writ petition vide W.P.No.33061 of 2024, seeking a

direction to respondent No.3 to admit him in a suitable hospital for

treatment. The said writ petition was allowed, and he has taken

treatment in the hospital of his choice. Respondent No.3 has

received the representation dated 03.07.2025 submitted by the

petitioner's father. However, his case does not fall within the

scope of Section 4 of the Act. Respondent No.3 intends to

communicate a copy of the reply to the petitioner's father.

5. In the light of aforesaid discussion, this Writ Petition is

disposed of, directing respondent No.3 to intimate the aforesaid

fact to the petitioner's father on consideration of his representation

dated 03.07.2025 within one week from the date of receipt of a

copy of this order by assigning specific reasons for rejecting the

same. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand

closed.

___________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J

07.08.2025 sa