High Court · 2025

. Res po nde nts/Com Pla in a nt Petition under Section 482 of Cr'P C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition' the High Court may be pleased to quash the Proceedings in Crime No 06 of 2O22 daled O5lO1l2O22 on the file of 1st Respondent P S Karimnagar lTown' Karimnagar District' State of Telangana l.A. NO:2O F 2022 Petition under Section 482 of Cr'P C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition' the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of further Crime No 06 of 2O22 dated 05 01 2022 on the file of 'l st Respondent P'S Karimnagar I Town' Karimnagar District' State of Telangana This periitror coming on for hearing, upon perusi rg tre l\lemorandum of Grounds of C r.i.ri,ra j petition and upon hearrngr re arguments of sri Naraparalu rvcreesh Advocate for the petitioner anJ vr-s. S.r\4adhavr, Asst- Pubric prr>ser;r t:r on beharf of the Respondent No.1 ancl nor e appeared for the Respond en t llc il The Court madr: :ht, fr:llowing: ORDER .a THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUWADISRIDEVI CRIMI NAL PETITI ONN o.504 o 2022 f ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 4B2of Cr'P'C' by the petitioner-accused No 1 seeking to quash the proceedings against him in Crime No.6 of 2022 of P S Karimnagar I Town' registered for the offences under Sections 153' 500' 505(2) and 506 of the lndian Penal Code (for short'lPC')'

2. Heard tVlr' Avaneesh Naraparaiu' learned counsel for the petitioner and tt/lrs. S.tr/adhavi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State No representation on behalf of respondent No 2' Perused the record'

3. The case of the Prosecution' in brief, is that the petitioner-accused rson. While Sri Bandi SaniaY Kumar' State President was the Government of No.1 is the BJP official sPokesPe Member of Parliament, Karimnagar and BJP protesting against G'O lr/ls No 317 passed by Telangana and to enforce Presidential order allocation of employees, he was arrested by the Police' The petitioner- accused No.1, being the official spokesperson has convened a press meet at BJP State Office, Nampally, Hyderabad' criticized the action of the Government for arresting their President and also commented on Zonal sYstem for 2 ;: indecen i rvorJs against one V.Satyan arayana,ra,ho s th: Commissioner of the Pci cr: Karimnagar, to remove his shirt ard vrear pink shirt. The accused flo,; Il and 3 have posted the said ccnterrt in their youTube il^:r,:by, defaming the image of Sri V.{iatyanatayana Basing :omplaint, a case in Crime No.6 cf 2022 trrr:titioner-accused No..l and others, for was reg jstered on the saiJ aga tst thr) Channek; the aforesaid offences "fence cognizancer :rf 4' rt is ccrrte'nded by the rearned counser for the petilioner that the petitioner-rrc r:r- s ed No' 1 is innocent and has bee, faisery impricated in the case' He f rrther submits that section '1gg of cr p.c. bars taking punishable under section 500 0f rpc. For the offence unrjer ll:ction 505(2) of rpc, sanction undr:r S,-.cticrn 196(1A) of Cr. P.C. is in;:n latory, however, in the present cas;e, s;anc lion was not obtained frcm *rr: competent authority. He further submits tirat the act of the petitioner-acctrsed No'1 is the opinion which he has rigrt to express under Articlel ig' I r(a) of the Constitution of lndia . There a re no specific allegations agairrr; the petitroner-accused No.1 offences alleqt:C against him are not made out. quash the p..c:ecrings against the petitioner-accused No.1 5. on th* or-err hand, the learned Assistant puL,ric prosecutor contended fl- a. lirc,re are specific allegations against the petitioner- ancl thr: inr yredients of Hen*r. hr: prayed to 3 accused No.1 and all the allegations levelled in the complaint as well as in the charge sheet are subject matter of trial, and hence, this is not a fit case to quash the proceedings at this stage. Accordingly, she prayed to dismiss the petition. 6 For better adjudication of the matter, Sections 500' 505(2) of IPC' 199(1) of Cr.P.C. and 196(1A) of Cr.P.C. is extracted hereunder: "500. Punishment for defamation.- Whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. 5ls(2)Statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill-will between c/asses.- Whoever makes, publishes or circulates any statement or repoft containing rumour or atarming news with intent to create or promote, orwhich is likely to create or promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of bifth, residence, language. caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between different reti-gious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, shatt be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both. Section 1 99(1 ). Prosecution for defamation.-- (1) No Courl shall take cognizance of an offence punishable under Chapter Wl of the tndian Penal Code (45 ot 1860) except upon a complaint made by some person aggrieved by the offence. Provided that where such person is under the age of eighteen years, or is an idiot or a lunatic, or is from slckness or infirmity unabte to make a complaint, or is a woman who' according to the locat custorns and manners, ought not to be compelled to appear in public, some other person may, with the leave of the Court, make a complaint on his or her behalf-

196. Prosecution for offences against the State and for criminal conspiracy to commit such offence. (1)No Courl shatt take cognizance of -(a)any offence punishable under Chapter Vl or under section 153-A, [section 295-4 or sub' section (1) of section 5O5l lsubstituted by Act 63 of 1980' Section 3, for "section 153-8, Section 29uA or Section 505" (w.e.f. 23.9.1980).1 of the lndian Penal Code (45 of 1860), o(b)a criminal conspiracy to commil such offence, or(c)any such abetment, as is described in section 108-A of the lndian i I i I I 4 : !.??:r !:, !!,#!!1 .: \?llt ^*x,1,t1 7 r,, u ", -,, s a, c t i o n o f .t,t,1 shar nru "ojn'riniu,,.i 1,,f,!3,,1.,:, t,t,.-,.t [rr_At io otfe 'c.. ounishabte '' der section t SS-A' ir- li,il_""-,)t^" ',1! ,'J "'' :1)tto, sls or the tiiitt "";:::,,.,^::-trs_s.:r rion (3) of tr,h) t criminal . ) tsDiracy to commt ,uii'onui"u'' "i"iilo .;,t tction of t, : :f i I : {1, | " ;, ;; ;rr r ,, t t h e o,,!,2," f,::n:;,, ;;;;;;r " d* 7. As pe. Section 199 of Cr.p.C., no Court srall takr cognizance of an offen<;e pLrrishabre under chapter XXr of rFC, ,hich includes the offence r:f Jefilnation, except upon a complaint naoe b,,, some person aggrieverJ i,y tre offence. ln the present case, the ar;grit,ved person is one V. Satyar ;tf ayana However, on the basis of po ice report of de facto c<>nrpra'inant, who is the Sub-lnspector of F,orrce, Ganneruvaram, criminar pro:;e:-rtion against the petitioner-accused No 1 was initiated Absence cf suchr compraint wourd render the pror;ecirtion as void and without jurisdiclio t. B. For the ,rflence under Section 505(2) of I:C, AS per Section 196(14) of Cr F)O., sanction has to be obtained fron t authority. ln tne Dresent case, no sanction as required u obtained for proc ereding against the petitioner_accuse,J nr jer law was ht r c6mps1sa1 No. 1 I Sectiorr )Cr512'1 o1 lpC deals with statements creating o_ promoting enmity, hatreC or ill_will between classes Section 153 of lpC s wantonly gtving provoc aric r with the intent to cause a riot. Secti,)n {;06 of lpC deals with crirnine I intimidation ln the instant case, just ern o rtinion was expressed by thr> petitioner-accused No.1 and there rs rrr specific , f _-tilt;- ,?\ 'l 5 allegation against him that due to the statement made by him, enmitY, hatred or ill-will was created between classes lnsofar as offences under Sections 153 and 506 of IPC are concerned' there are no specific allegations against the petitioner-accused No 1 with regard to wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause a riot and criminal intimidation Free speech of the citizens of this Country cannot be stifled by implicating them in criminal cases' unless such speech has the tendency to affect public order. As such, the offences under Sections 153 and 505(2) of IPC are liable to be quashed 'lO. For the foregoing reasons, the petitioner-accused No'1 cannot be dragged into criminal prosecution and the same would be an abuse of process of the law, and hence, the proceedings against the petitioner- accused No.1 are liable to be quashed.

11. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed, quashing the proceedings against the petitioner-accused No.1 in Crime No.6 of 2022 of P.S. Karimnagar I Town Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// SD/. L. VIJAYA LAXMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTI OFFICER To, 'I . The ll Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Karrmnagar. 2. The. Srtation House Officer, Karimnagar I Town police Station, Karimnagar 3. One CC to Sri. Naraparaju Avaneesh, Advocate [OpuC]. 4. Two CCs to pubtic prosr s. Two cD copies. scutor' High couft for the s1ate of Telangana. IOUTI l, I H|GH co[,Ft]- DATED:01 t}4t2}2s ORDER CRLP.No. S04 t>t 2022 , 4t{ (,/ ! 1 ,1111 296 {,( ?- C) I)/r r f.l! a .t \) L t CRIMINAL PETI ION IS ALLOWED. @fi"W