The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in CC.No.21l2O23 on the file of the XVll Additional Metropolitan [t/agistrate at [Maheshwaram, Ranga Reddy District. l.A. NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the ctrcumstances stated in the lt/lemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioner in CC.No.2'112023 on the file of the XVll Additional lrletropolitan l/agistrate at [\Iaheshwaram, Ranga Reddy District, during the pendency of Criminal Petition. .. t This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri P. Animi Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Assistant Public Prosecutor (TG/AP) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 . The Gourt made the following Order:- THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI CRIMINAL PETITION No.924 OF 2o25 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short 'BNSSJ by petitioner/accused to quash the proceedings against him in CC.No.21 of 2023 on the file of XVII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Maheshwaram, Ranga Reddy District. The offences alleged against petitioner are under Sections 408, 42O and 504 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC').

2. Heard Mr. P.Animi Reddy, learned counsel for petitioner and Ms. S. Madhavi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1 - State. Perused the material on record.

3. A complaint is filed by respondent No.2/ complainant against petitioner on 26.O9.2022 and the sarne was registered as FiR No.314 of 2022 under Sections 408, 420 and 504 of IPC. It is averred in the complaint that petitioner/ accused was appointed as accountant/malager in Sri Thiruma,la Fiiing Service Station on 77.06.2022. That on

22.09.2022, respondent No.2 / complainant noticed that SBI 2 JAK, J cRLP_g24_2025 bank cheque book, cash .of Rs.5,O0,0OO/- given by customers, bank deposit vouchers, locker keys, cashier daiiy vouchers and three months cash total of Rs.5,96,900/- was found missing. It is further averred that petitioner/accused did not show debt amount either in the bank or in cash given by customers and hence, total loss of Rs.9,46,900/- is caused. That on questioning petitioner/ accused, he threatened respondent No.2 with dire consequences and abused him in filthy lalguage and further threatened that he would darnage the service station of respondent No.2, hence the complaint.

4. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet is filed on the file of XVII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Maheshwaram, Ranga Reddy District and 161 Cr.P.C statements have been recorded bv the Police-

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner/accused submitted that on 24.O9.2022, petitioner/ accused lodged a complaint at Kandukur Police Station and that the said complaint was made as a GD entry by Sub Inspector of Police. It is further submitted that petitioner/ accused has specifically averred that he had ,l { I I 3 JAJ(, J cRr_P_924 202s shown the entire account on 22.09.2022 to the owner of the service station i.e., respondent No.2. In spite of which respondent No.2 has abused petitioner in filthy language and has physically assaulted him. It is also averred that respondent No.2 has abused petitioner's. children and his wife and also not paid promised amount of salary to petitioner and made him work for 14 hours per day. It is also submitted that the complaint is entered in the GD entry on

24.09.2022 however, it is stitl pending in the Police Station without any action being taken.

6. It is pointed out that the complaint filed by respondent No.2 on 26.09.2022, is only with a motive to harass the petitioner by using his influence. It is 1astly submitted that respondent No.2 is an influential person and there is no proper explanation for the delay in filing the complaint on

26.09.2022, when the incident had taken place on .

22.09.2022.

7. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has submitted that complaint 1S lodged by petitioner/ accused

24.09.2022 and another complaint by respondent No.2 on

26.09.2022, in relation to the same incident which happened .2 4 JAK, J cRr_P 924 2025 on 22.09.2022. lt is further submitted that the allegations levelled against each other in both the complaints have to be decided at the trial after investigation.

8. Heard iearned counsels, perused, the record and considered the rival submissions.

9. Petitioner/accused filed complaint on 24.Og.2022 annexed as document at page No.31, a GD entry is shown. Having received the complaint on 24.09.2022 at 12:OO p.m, no FIR qame to be registered. Respondent No.2 who is the owner of service station, has lodged a complaint on 26.09.2022 against petitioner, alleging petitioner/accused has cheated for an amount of Rs.9,46,900/- and FIR is registered.

10. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with proceedings in CC.No.21 of 2023 on the file of XVII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Maheshwaram, Ranga Reddy District. It is also submitted that petitioner be permitted to file discharge petition before the trial Court and that in CC.No.21 of 2023, no charges were framed and it is at the examination stage , 5 JAK. J CRLP 92J 2025 and is posted to tZ .O4.2O25 for examination of the petitioner/ accused. 1 1 . Taking into account the entire factual matrix of the case, it is observed that two complaints have been lodged before the police Station. However, only one complaint which was lodged by respondent No.2 on 26.09.2022, is registered as FIR. The complaint liled by petitioner/accused on 24.09.2022, was not registered as FIR, for the reasons best known to the authorities. Whereas, the complaint which was lodged by' respondent No.2 with a delay of 4 days is registered as FIR and charge sheet is filed. No explanation is given by respondent No.2 for the delay in lodging the complaint for the incident which occurr ed on 22.09.2022. 72' Be that as it may, this court is not incrined to delve into these aspects and this Court deems it appropriate that presence of petitioner/accused can be dispensed with and is accordingly dispensed with. petitioner/accused is at riberty to file discharge petition before the trial Court. i 3. It is made clear that petitioner shall present himself before the learned Magistrate, if his presence is required. Petitioner shall Iile affrdavit(s) that he will not dispute his 1 I 6 JAK, J CRLP 92.1 2025 identity and that the proceedings can go on in his absence' to be conducted by his counsel(s)' Learned counsel(s) for petitioner shall represent before the trial Court without fail on all dates' Petitioner shall not dispute the proceedings conducted in his absence' This order shall stand vacated automaticallv, if petitioner fails to attend the proceedings as and when summoned by Court and also when the counsel(s) representing petitioner fail to attend Court proceedings on any dates' Any observations made in this order shall not influence the trial Court while considering or concluding the case at the time of trial 14. With the above observations' the Criminal Petition is disposed of Miscel]aneousapplicationspending,ifany,shalistand closed I'TRUE COPY'I .i' ASSIS \ 'Tlr'-'g't?[EE SECTION OFFICER To, 1

2. J. The XVll Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Maheswaram' Rangareddy Rachakonda District T:':1r,,"" House orficer' Kandukur P'S ' High Court for the State of Telangana at Two CCs to the P-ublic "ot"J"'' Hyderabad [OU t 1' .- ..\or r.l One CC to Sri P Animi Reddy' Advocate [OPUCI 4 5 Two CD CoPtes I I HIGH COUR-T DATED:0510212025 ORDER CRLP.No.924 of 2025 (

4. C o ;H1 TAli 16 APF 2M C I t 'r DISPOSING OF THE CRLP * m\r