[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Telangana High Court
Nafees Sultana vs The State Of Telangana on 7 April, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
WRIT PETITION No.10279 of 2026
DATE OF ORDER: 07.04.2026
Between:
Nafees Sultana and another
...Petitioners
AND
The State of Telangana,
Rep. by its Principal Secretary,
Home Department,
Hyderabad, and others
...Respondents
ORDER:
This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, is filed seeking the following relief:
"....to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly
one in the nature of Mandamus directing the
respondents authorities Nos.1 to 5 to provide
immediate and adequate police protection to the
petitioners and their properties to enable safe
reopening and peaceful operation at schedule A
property i.e., Municipal No.4-25-108/6/10/A on Plot
No.16, in Survey No.337/5, admeasuring 260.00 Sq.
Yards or 217.36 Sq.mtrs., with Built-up area 100 Sq.
feet, A.C.C. and schedule B property i.e., Municipal
No. 4-25-108/6/10/A/1 on Plot No.17, in Survey
No.337/5, admeasuring 260.00 Sq. Yards or 217.36
Sq. mtrs., with Built-up area 100 Sq. feet, A.C.C.,
situated at Wadi-E-Mahmood, Attapur Village, GHMC,
Rajendra Nagar Circle, Ranga Reddy District,
Telangana, and to pass....."
2. Heard Sri Zabi Ur Rahman Khan, learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners and Sri M.Srinivas, learned
Assistant Government Pleader for Home for respondent
Nos.1 to 5 and perused the record.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would
submit that petitioner No.1 herein is the absolute owner and
possessor of portion of house bearing municipal No.4-25-
108/6/10/A on Plot No.16 in Sy.No.337/5, admeasuring
260.00 sq.yards or 217.36 Sq.mtrs, situated at Wadi-E-
Mahmood, Attapur Village, GHMC Rajendra Nagar Circle,
Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same from its
lawful owner Mrs. Fouzia Fathima through a registered sale
deed bearing document No.8072 of 2025, dated 23.08.2025
(the schedule property herein referred as 'schedule A').
Petitioner No.2 herein is also the absolute owner and
possessor of portion of house bearing municipal No.4-25-
108/6/10/A/1 on Plot No.17 in Sy.No.337/5, admeasuring
260.00 sq.yards or 217.36 Sq.mtrs, situated at Wadi-E-
Mahmood, Attapur Village, GHMC Rajendra Nagar Circle,
Ranga Reddy District, having purchased the same from its
lawful owner Mr. Ilyas Ali Khan through a registered sale
deed bearing document No.8073 of 2025, dated
23.08.2025(the schedule property herein referred as
'schedule B').
4. Since 08.03.2026, the unofficial respondents are
claiming to have purchased the schedule A and B properties
under forged and fabricated notarized documents and have
been harassing the petitioners stating that they are the
absolute owners and are illegally trespassing into the
schedule properties. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners
lodged a complaint on 08.03.2026 before respondent No.5,
but the police refused to register it citing the unofficial
respondents' association with a local political party and their
influence. Thereafter, the petitioners lodged a complaint
with respondent No.3 on 10.03.2026 seeking intervention.
Despite the above said complaints, the official respondents
have failed to act, stating the matter is civil in nature and
directed the petitioners to approach the Civil Court.
5. The petitioners constrained to file O.S.No.156 of 2026,
on the file of the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge, City
Civil Courts at Rajendra Nagar. The Court ordered notices to
the unofficial respondents and posted the matter for hearing
on 08.04.2026. Sooner the above suit is filed the petitioners
are receiving threatening calls from the unofficial
respondents. The petitioners do not have any other source
of income except the rents from the schedule properties
which has been shut because of the threats from the
unofficial respondents. The threats to life necessiate
immediate police protection to enable safe operation of the
business. The police authorities are duty-bound under law
to protect citizens from such threats and register complaints,
under relevant provisions of Section 352(3) BNS, besides
refusal to register the complaint contravenes Section 173 of
the BNSS and settled propositions of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in Lalitha Kumari vs. Government of U.P. 1
Consequently, counsel prayed for issuance of an appropriate
(2014) 2 SCC 1
direction to the competent officer to ensure registration of
the case.
6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home,
opposing the contentions of the petitioners would firstly
submit that the dispute between the petitioners and the
unofficial respondents is purely civil in nature and secondly
no complaint has been lodged by the petitioners with
respondent No.5. The petitioners have already filed a
detailed representation before respondent No.3 on
10.03.2026, which has been duly acknowledged and is
presently under consideration by the said authority and
appropriate action will be taken as and when a decision is
made on the said representation.
7. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case and upon perusal of the material available on
record, it is manifest on the face of the record that the
petitioners have already filed a suit vide O.S.No.156 of 2026
in respect of the property in dispute. It is noted that notices
have been issued therein, which clearly demonstrates that
civil proceedings are pending before the competent trial
Court. On perusal of the representation dated 10.03.2026
submitted by the petitioners, it is evident that no relief, such
as police protection, has been sought therein. However, the
petitioners have straightaway filed the present writ petition
seeking police protection, which does not deserve any
consideration. As stated by the learned Assistant
Government Pleader for Home, the said representation is
presently under consideration before respondent No.3 and as
and when a decision is taken thereon, the same shall be duly
intimated to the petitioners and respondent No.3 is also
directed to take appropriate action strictly in accordance
with law.
8. With the above observations and directions, this writ
petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending,
shall stand closed.
____________________
E.V.VENUGOPAL, J
Dated: 07.04.2026
VSU
