The High Court · 2025

Hosuewife, Rl/o. Srinadhapuram Village, Anumula Mandal, Nalgonda District ...Respondents / Defacto Complainant Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pfeased to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.499 o'f 2024 on the file of Judicial First Class ti4agistrate at Nidamanoor, Nalgonda District for the offences uls 448, 427 , 504 and 506 r/w 34 IPC against the petitioners/A1 and 42. l.A. NO: 2OF 2025 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioners/Accused-1 and 2 in pursuant to the C.C.No.499 of 2024 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nidamanoor, Nalgonda District, pending disposal of the above quash petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Mr Pulimamidi Shashidhar Redcly, Advocate for the Petitioners and [,4s S lr4adlravi, Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1. The Court made the following Order: o THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTTCE ANIL KIIMAR WKANTI CRIMINAL PETITION No.853 OF 2025 ORDER: This Criminal Petition.is hled under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short tsNSS') by petitioners / accused Nos. 1 to 2 to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No.499 of 2024 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nidamanoor, Nalgonda District. The offences alleged against petitioners are under Sections 448,427,504 and 506 rlw 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 1PC').

2. Heard Mr. Pulimamidi Shashidar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. S. Madhavi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent State. Perused the material on record

3. FIR is dated 29.OI.2O24. As per the allegations in the FIR that properties were divided arnong the de-facto complainant and her children in the presence of elders and she has been cultivating a parcel of land for the last 30 years and staying in the house. Petitioners/accused trespassed 2 JAK, J CRLP 853 2025 rnto her iand and broke the lock of house and ,laken away the hou se articles and when asked by the de_facto complainant, she was threatened and abusecl 1n lilthy language.

4. It is r:ontended by learned counsel for petitroners that predominaltly, the dispute is civil in nature and that there is a partition among the brothers with respect to lalrl and that allegations made are false in nature and that criminal law is set into motion, onty to trouble the petitioners.

5. On the other hard, Iearned Assistant public prosecutor submitted that allegations made out in the FtR are true and the matter needs to be investigated. Hence, therr: are no merits in the petition and prayed to dismiss the criminar petition

6. On a perusal of the allegations made in the FlR/complaint and the documents annexed in the rr:cord, it appears that the dispute primarily is civil in natlrre with regard to propert5r dispute, immovable property Thi's Court is of the opinion that petitioners be permitted to file discharge petition before appropriate Court Even on perusal I I I I i J JAK, J CRLP 853 2025 C} of the entire record, it is observed that matter pertains to immovable property and there are no specific allegations with regard to arry criminal acts. Revenue proceedings are also annexed as documents to the petition.

7. In view of the dispute being predominantly civil in nature, this Court deems it appropriate that petitioners be granted liberty to file an application before the trial Court seeking their discharge. On such application being frled, the trial Court shall dispose of the sanne on merits as expeditiously as possible from the date of hling of the said petition, without being influenced by any of the observations made by this Court. t \ 8, It is made clear that till then, the appearance of petitioners/accused Nos. 1 to 2 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nidamanoor, Nalgonda District in C.C.No.499 of 2024, is dispensed with, unless their presence is required t I and necessary by the trial Court. g . The petitioners shall file an affidavit that they will not dispute their identity and the proceedings can go on in their absence which will be conducted by their counsel' Petitioners 4 JAK, J cR r-P 853 2025 sha-ll not clispute the proceedings conducted in their absence. It is also made clear that petitioners shal1 present themselves '"t hen called by the trial Court, if their presence is necessary. This order shall stand vacated automar-ically, if petitioners fail to attend the proceedings as and whr:n cal1ed for. Any observations made in this order shall not influence the Court below while considering or concluding thr: case at the time of trial. 1 0. With the above observations, this Criminal Pt:tition is disposed of //TRUE COPY// Sd/- MOHD. ISMAIL ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I SECTION OFFICER To, \

1. The Judicial First Class Magistrate at Nidamanoor 2. The Station House Officer, Haliya PS, Nalgonda District 3. Two CCs tc the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Hyderabad [OUT] -[elangana,

4. One CC to Sri Pulimamidi Shashidhar Reddy, Advocate IOPUC] 5. Two CD Copies VAJDL w HIGH COURT DATED:2910112025 \'Y- t i< c ,)- ORDER !. (4 -\ ;.i\ ( )rr ,$ -$(<"s t'*.i \ + ,/ CRLP.No.853 of 2025 ) J ItoiH * DISPOSING OF THE CRLP { \o