The High Court · 2025

1. The State of Telangana, Through Public Prosecutor, High Court for the Sate ...Respondent No.l 2. Kum Prabhala Lakshmi Poojitha, D/o P. Venkat Eashwar, Aged about 26 years, Occ. Architect (Construction), R/o.H.No1-2-60lA,Kakatiya Nagar, Habsiguda, Hyderbad. ...RESPON DENT/COMPLAI NANTS Petition under Section 528 of BNSS Act, praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the C.C. No.7485 of 2024 on the file of the lV Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad in the interest of justice. : I I i i i I I i : ! I I I l.A. NO: 2OF 2025 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 stay all further proceedings in C.C. No.7485 of 2024 in the Court of the lV ADDL Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad, pending the above criminal petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. JELLA SRIKANTH, Advocate for the Petitioners and Mr. E. GANESH, the Assistant Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and Mr. THUMMAL LAXMI NARAYANA, for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER .-=...%> THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VEIYUG}OPAL ORDER: This Criminat Petition is filed under Section 528 ofBNSS by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 seeking to quash C.C.No.7485 of 2024 on the fite of the learned IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad, registered for the offences under Section 448, 427, 506, 5O9, rlw 34 of Indian Penal Code.

2. The brief facts of the case are that tl:e complainant along with her family members was residing at IGkatiya Nagar, Habsiguda for the last 20 to 25 years. Due to her grandfather's demise in the same house, they vacated the house. On 30.03 ,2024 at about L2:3O hours she received a call from watchman informing that her uncle Mr. P.V.Ramana along with his son Mr. P. Phani Krishna and aunty Vimala and her brother Mr. Sai Prasad have trespassed into their house by breaking the tock and have thrown their things outside- Immediately she went to the spot and tried to stop them. Instead of stopping their overt acts, they have abused her in frlthy language. At the time of incident, the cornplainant's father was absent. Taking the sarne as advantage, Mr. P. Phani Kumar and others threatened the complainant with dire consequences. Henp-e--$.g. complainant lodged a complaint. z

3. On receipt of the said complaint, the Police Station, O.U.City, Hyderabad, registered a case in Crime No.156 of 2024, dated 3O.O3.2O24, under Sections 448,427,506, 5O9 r/w 34 of IPC.

4. Heard Sri A.Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel representing the petitioners, Sri J.Srikanth, learned counsel for Sri T.Laxminaryana, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and Sri E.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for

5. Sri A.Ravinder Reddy, learned counsel representing Mr. J.Srikanth, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that respondent No.2 and the petitioners are the family members, respondent No.2 is the daughter of accused No.1 brother. Father of accused No.1 and grandfather of respondent No.2 has executed a Gift Deed in favour of accused No.l and the father of respondent No.2. Father of respondent No.2 had offered his share to accused No.l and the same was purchased by accused No. L uidedocument No.7263 off 2023, dated O4.O5.2O23 for a total sale consid.eration of Rs.1,10,OO,OOO/-. From then, accused No.1 is in possession of the subject property. Father of respondent No.2 had made a request to permit him to stay along with their father in the premises of accused No.l and after the demise of grandfather, respondent No.2 vacated -.,- ,L 3

6. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that accused No.l lodged complaint to the Inspector of Police, Osmania University Police station against respondent No.2 alleging that respondent No.2 and her family members have tried to interfere with the peaceful possession of the propert5r and the police oflicial s have not take any action due to the matter is civil in nattrre. The petitioners also filed a perpetual injunction suit uide O.S.No.29 2 of 2O2A, which is pending for consideration. when accused No.l is the owner of the subject property the very essence of Sections 448 and 427 do not attract. The petitioners never intimidated or threatened, caused any abused, Section 5O9 do not attract. Therefore, the charge is liable to be quashed as respondent No.2 filed a false complaint based on vague, unsubstantiated and frivolous allegations.

7. Sri T.Laxminaryana, learned counsel appezrring for respondent No.2 would submit that it is arr admitted fact that the civil proceedings are pending between the petitioners and respondent No.2 and no interim injunction has been granted so far. White it is pending, in the absence of obtaining any interim order, the petitioners have taken law into their hands and have committed aforesaid offences. Unless and until full-fledged trial is conducted by examining the evidence and facts before it, truth will not be elicited. 4

8. Sri E.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.l State would submit that as many as 8 witnesses have been examined and their statements were also recorded and indulgence of this Court at this stage is unwa:ranted. Hence seeks to dismiss the criminal petition.

9. Considering the subrnission made by learned counsel for the parties, the attendance of petitioners herein is dispensed dft, srrbject to the following conditions: r) Petitioners shall always be represented by their counsel on record. ii) They shall Iile an allidavit stating that in their absence, the proceedings conducted by the counsel will not be disputed by them in any manner and shall not dispute their identity also. iii) They shall appear before the learned Magistrate as and when their presenc€ is required. In the event of the petitioners' failure to appear when the Court directs, this order dispensing their attendance shall stand cancelled.

10. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of granting the liberty, as sought for by the petitioners, to file an appropriate application before tJ:e trial Court, seeking discharge. Upon frling such application, the trial Ct>'zrrt shait examine and pass appropriate -*,'-=:=- / 5 orders in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (03) months from tlre date of frling such application. Miscellaneous petitions, if a.ny, pending in this criminal petition, shall stand closed. SD'. M.NAGAMANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 ,/TRUE COPY'/ SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The lV-Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad. 2. The Station House Officer, O.U.City Police Station, Hyderabad. Dist. 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad. (OUT) 4. One CC to Mr. JELLA SRIKANTH, Advocate IOPUCI 5. One CC to Mr. THUMMAL LAXMI NARAYANA, Advocate [oPUC] 6. Two CD CoPies RC/PSL Yx : j i i i I I I I I I I I i I I i I j j i HIGH COURT DATE : 31 10712025 D \ \ ,; i,il t izi I ; 22 t;C 216 ,+ * TCili:9 CRLP.No.2S17 of 2025 Accordingly, the Crimina! Petition is D isposed of. q,*{* X",