The High Court · 2025

praying that in the circumstances riminal Petition, the High Court may against the accused / petitioner in dchal Police Station, at Cyberabad, on'ble XXll Metropolitan Magistrate inst the Petitioner/ Accused No.7 and interest of justice. rti- This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Rachakonda Ramakrishna, Advocate for the Petitioners and Sri M.Vivekananda Reddy, Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri Venkatesh Deshpande, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTIC J. SREENTVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITIO No.2163 of2O2L ORDER: This Criminal Pctitio has been filed under Scction 482 ol the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') by the etitioners/accused Nos.7 and 8, sceking to quash th proceedings against them irr C.C.No.B18 ol 2O2O n the lile ol the XXII M c tropo Iitan Magistrzrtc, C bcrabad, Medchal , for the offenccs punishable under ections 42O, 46a and 47 1 r/w 34 of the Indian I)cnal ode, 186O.

2. When Lh is rnattcr !va taken up for hearing on I 1.08.2O25, thcre was no pre scntation on behalf of the petitioners as u,ell as respondent No.2 in the morning session and in th afternoon session either physical rnode or virtua mode. To give one opportunity, the matLer AS posted to 19.O4.2O25 under the caption 'for dis ssal'. Today also there is no representation on behal of respondent No.2 in the mornlng session and in th afternoon session either tv, i ( I 2 physical rnode or virtual mode. Hcn<:c, this Court is not having any option cxcept to pr<>ccecl u,iti-r the matter on meriLs.

3. Heard Mr.Racheik<>nda I?amakrishna. learn<rd counsel f<; r th<: pctitior-rcrs and Mr.M.V'j vckanzrndzr Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosccutor appearing lor rcspondcnt Nc.r. I -Statc

4. l-carncd counscl ft;r thc petitioncrs submittcd that the petitioners havc not comrnittcrl al-ry offence and the)' were falsely inrplicated in thc prescnL case as accuserl Nos.7 and 8 on1-y on thc groun<l tl-rat thcy are real estate agents arnrl Lhe1, coopcr:.rtcd u'ith tl-rc other accused in committing t.l-rc allcged offcncc. Ile hrrther subrnittcd thaI r:r-rLirr: allcgertior-rs :tr t: lcvcllcd against accused Nos.1 t<> 6 only and accusr:([ Nos.1 to 6 have approached this Court and liled Criminal Petition No.1 I3O of 2O2O scckir-rg to qrrash the proceedings against them in Crime No.53O of 2018 of Medchal police Station. In thc said case, accused Nos.1 to 6 and respondcnt No.2/de facto cc>rrtoiainant 3 have entered into cornpro ise and filed I.A.No.2 of 2O2O to record compromisc nd this Court taking into consideration thc joinL rne o filed by Lhern, quashed the proceedings in Crime No.53O of 2018 against accused Nos. 1 to 6 vide rder dated 73.O3.2O2O. I{owever, t}rc Invcstigating ( fficer without taking into consideration the above sai fact, filed charge sheet against the petitioncrs, specially there are no allegations much lcss sp cific allegation s against Lhern to attract the ingredi ts of Sections 42O, 468 and 47) r/w 34 of IPC he continuation of the proceedings against the peti ioners is a clear abuse of process of lau

5. Learned Assistant pu lic Prosecutor has not disputed the cornpouncling of thc offences alleged against accused Nos.l to 6.

6. Having considercd the ubmissions made by the respective parties ald after pe sa1 of the material available on record, it reveals that initiall Crime No.530 of 2018 was registered, basing orr the compl t lodged by the de facto i i I 4 complainant/ respondent No.2, by thc Station House Officer, Medchal Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate for various offences i.e., 120b, 181, 191, 192, 193, l96, 199, 200, 209, 379, 447, 427, 463, 464, 465, 46E, 170, 471, 473 and 476 r /w 34 of IPC against the petitioners ar-rd accused Nos. 1 to 6

7. The rccord further reveals that accused Nos.1 to 6 have approached this Court and filed Criminal Pctition No 1 130 of 2O2O seeking to quash thc proceerlings against them in Crime No.53O of 2O1B of N4cdchal police Stalion in the said criminal petition, accused Nos. 1 to 6 and respondenL No.2/de fcrcto c<>rnplainant cr-rtcred into cornprornise and filed joint me lrlo. Tzrking into consideration ttrc joint rnemo filed by thc respective parties in the said crirninal petition, Crirnina'l Pelition No.1130 of 2O2O was allowed by this Courl uide order dated 13.O3.2O2O and quashed the proceedings 1n Crime No.53O of 2O1B against accused Nos.1 to 6 Investigating Officer without taking The consideration the above said fact, filed charge sheet I l i 5 against the pe titi<>ners. It trite law that once the S offences were cotrtpounded against accused Nos.1 to 6, continr-ra.tion of the pro eedings against accused Nos.7 and B is a clear abus of process of 1aw. B. For the foregoing, this ourt is of the considered edings against pc titio ners / accu sc d Nos.7 nd 8 in Crime No.53O of 2Ol B are liable to bc quash d

9. Accordingly, the cnmt al petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitio ners / accu se d Nos.7 and 8 in C.C.No.UlB of 2O2O on the file of the XXII Metropolitan Magistr Le, Cyberabad, Medchal are hereby quashed Pending misccllancous applications, if any, shall stand closed . SD/. T SRINIVASA REDDY ISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE C PYII SECTION OFFICER 1 2 3 4 5 6 . The XXll Metropolitan Magistrate, Med The Station House Officer, Medchal Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High C Hyderabad [OUTI . One CC to Sri Rachakonda Ramakrish . One CCto Sri Venkatesh Deshpande . Two CD Copies o hal, Cyberabad lice Station, Cyberabad urt for the State of Telangana at a, Advocate [OPUC] Advocate [OPUC] \ To, HIGH COURT DATED: 1910812025 ORDER CRLP.No.2163 of 2021 liiL S,7l f^ o() ArlE 2025 7 * SF1.,.T(; .<\ v f) * ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION