High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 09 TEL CK 1372

K. Lakshma Reddy vs The State of Telangana & Others

Telangana High Court · Decided on 2 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Tangirala Madhavi Devi, J
RESULT
Disposed of
CASE NUMBER
WRIT PETITION NO: 28838 OF 2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 387 words

Challenging the continuation of LOC against the petitioner in respect of FIR No.102 of 2019 on the file of W.P.S. Saroornagar, dated 26.03.2019, even after filing of the charge sheet, which was numbered as C.C.No.6657 of 2019 on the file of the XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar as illegal and arbitrary, this writ petition has been filed.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, appearing for respondents No.1 to 3, and Ms. Sushma Nellutla, learned Standing Counsel for the Central Government, appearing for respondent No.5.

3.

The learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home, on written instructions, submitted that the petitioner is Accused No.1 and that he did not choose to cooperate with the investigating agency, and, therefore, the LOC was issued against the petitioner/Accused No.1. It is submitted that, after completion of the investigation in respect of Accused Nos.2 to 4, a charge sheet was filed, which was numbered as C.C.No.6657 of 2019, and the case is pending trial on the file of the XIV Judicial (Metropolitan) Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, and that the NBW is pending against the petitioner/Accused No.1. It is submitted that the case has been split up vide C.C.No.246 of 2016 against the petitioner/Accused No.1. Therefore, continuation of the LOC is necessary in order to secure the presence of the petitioner.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that the petitioner intends to travel to India and participate in the investigation as well as the trial. He submitted that the petitioner prayed for suspension of the LOC so that he can travel back to India and participate in the proceedings.

5.

In view thereof, this Court directs the petitioner to furnish the details of his travel and thereafter, the police shall give appropriate directions to the authorities concerned not to arrest the petitioner when he travels to India and on arrival in India, he shall immediately report before the police station concerned and give an undertaking that he will participate in the investigation as well as trial and surrender his passport. Further, the petitioner shall not travel abroad without the permission of the trial Court.

6.

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.