High Court · 2025

3. Sri T. NagarjunaReddy. Sub-lnspector of Railway Police Force,, Secundeiabad, Rep. by its Central Govt. Standing Council, High Court at Hyderabad ...RESPONDENTS 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 is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.610 of 2024 as against the PetitioneriAccused No.23 on the file of the court of ll Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways at Secunderabad and may pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble court may be pleased to deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. l.A. NO: 1OF 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 lt is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in C.C. No.610 of 2024 on the file of the court of ll Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways at Secunderabad against the petitioner herein for the offence under.section 147,'145 (b), 145 (c). 146 and 174 (a) of Railways Act, pending disposal of the quash petition and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. This Petitiorr rxrming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Crimina Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Mr' Rama Krishna Kulkarni, learned counsel representing Mr. Vadapally Agni '(umar, learned counsel for the pditioner and Mr. V.T.Kalyan Advocate, It,rarned central Government Stanrling Counsel representing Mr. Gadi Praveett [':umar, learned Deputy Solicitor Gernr:'al of lndia appearing for Respodent No.3. The Court made the following: ORDER I THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL PETITION No.2674 OF 20.25 ORDER: The present Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.6 10 of 2024 on the f,rle of the learned II Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways at Secunderabad registered against the petitioner/ accused No.23 for the offences punishable under Sections 145(b), 1a5(c), 146, 147 and 174(a) of the Railways Act.

2. Heard Mr.Rama Krishna Kulkarni, learned counsel representing Mr.Vadapally Agni Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.V.T.Kalyan, learned Central Government Stalding Counsel representing Mr.Gadi Praveen Kumar, learned Deputy Soiicitor General of India appearing for respondent No.3.

3. The brief facts of the case are that ot 17 .06 .2022 , the unemployed youth and army job aspirants, organized Rail Roko Agitation' at Secunderabad Railway Station with a demand to cancel the "Agnipath Scheme" launched by the Central Government for short service recruitment in the Indian Army; that about 1O0O to 1500 youth entered into Secunderabad Railway Station by carrying flags, banners and rods through ; i I ,i 7 several er.tries by track, over threw the gate dutv brrndo busth staff by ob st -,rcting railway employees in disc ha rging their duties; tllat tire youth shouted slogans againsl t he Centra-l Governmenl. F'olicies, ransacked and damagecl hugge quantity of railway properti, including passenger amenities, CIITV cameras, burnt th,: cr.,zrches, pelted stones on Rai1wa.5, rnachinery/ equipment irrr:.rrding Engines and Police PersonnelT RI)F on duty, and broke all :he coach windows of trains stable<l or Platforms; that the Polr r:e personnel and RPF staff atter-rdecl b,>ndo busth under the slLl,ren.ision of Additional Director ernd oth:r Superior Officers; tha, Jre agitators did not obey the jnstrtrclions of the Police an d R PIr, continued with pelting stoncs : that as a precautionarr nreasure in saving the lives of the pa,;sr:ngers, safe guarding t.he Firrilway property ald the lives of th: rassengers, all the trains rr e te cancelled. Basing on the said facts, the present crime is registered against the petitioners/ accusec I'[os.1 to 62 for the ofi'en:e's punishable under Sections 145(b) 145(c), 146, 147 and 174ta) f the Railways Act.

4. Lear:-ierl :ounsel for the petitioner subrn its that the respondent- F'o li,:e have conducted investigation in a haphazard marrner ald ri. ilhout verifying as to who took part -n the alleged 3 Rail Roko Agitation' arrayed the petitioner herein as accused No.23 in C.C.No.610 of 2024. He further submits that there are no specific allegations against the petitioner and that he was only a member of the whats app group of army job aspirants; that the petitioner had travelled from Kamareddy by Train and arrived at Secunderabad Railway Station at about O8:50 A.M. on the alleged date of incident; that the petitioner came to platform No.l at 09:10 A.M. and by the time he reached platform No.l alt the reported violent agitation was completed.

5. He further submits that the petitioner belonged to Schedule Tribe (ST) Community ald haiis from a poor family of Lambada Thanda of Birkur Thanda and Village of Sangam, Nasrullabad Mandal Kamareddy District, TG; that with the financial assistance of his aged parents, who were labourers by profession, the petitioner had completed his Graduation Degree (B.Sc.) and later, selected as the Constable (GD) in Indo-Tibetan Border Police Force in the recruitment process conducted by the Staff Selection Commission; that the implication of the petitioner, falsely in the subject crime is causing hardship to the petitioner ald spoiling his bright employment prospects. He states that the petitioner is falsely implicated in the present crime basing on the I : + confession al sjt,alements of the co-accused, u,hich i'; abuse of process of 1zr,\, Therefore, relying on the order datel )4.06.2024 passed b1' this (lourt in Cr1.P.No.92 I of 2024, he se elrs to quash the impugn erl p*oceedings. 6 . Learnerl (lrentral Government Standing Co u rs :1 submits that the rnat'-e - requires to be tried and only ttpon conclusion of the full-flc'dger,l trial, the truth would be elicited. Ih erefore, he seeks to disrLr,.s this Criminal Petition

7. Havi:rg re gard to the submissions of botl-r tle learned counsel and .r;ror-r perusal of the material ar-ailable on record, this Court is of the opinion that accused Nos.2 2 to 27 are suspected as asitators in the 'Rail Roko Agitation' ltirst ng on their confessior ral srl zrtements and Section 25 of the Inc ia I Evidence Act prohibil sr t r c use of confessions made to eL p< ,hce officer against the a,cr:rsed in a criminal tria1. Therefore, rel",ing on the decision passr'<l by the Hon'ble Supreme Court ir, State of Haryana \Is. Bhajan Lall ald the order dated 04.Ct6.21124 passed by this Courl ir-t Cr1.P.No.92 1 of 2024, this Court is; ,;f :he opinion that the allegaticns made in the F.LR. or complaint. ,rrr: so absurd and inherenr-lr improbable on the basis of lvhict r ro prudent ' 1992 Supp ( 1) Sr rrreme Court Cases 335 : 5 person can ever reach to a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the petitioner/ accused No'23. Hence, the proceedings in so far as petitioner/ accused No.23 are concerned in C.C.No.61O of 2024 on the filq of the learned II Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways at Secunderabad for the offences punishable under Sections 145(b), 1a5(c), 146, 747 and 174(al of the Railways Act are hereby quashed.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed Sd/- V HARI PRASAD DEPUW REGISTRAR To, //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

1. The ll Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways at Secunderabad. 2. One CC to Sri. Vadapally Agni Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Sri. Gadi Praveen Kumar Dy. SOLICITOR GEN' OF INDIA Advocate [OPUC]

4. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

5. Two CD CoPies SwVosl d^v HIGH COIJR.T DATED: 01rc512025 ORDER GRLP.No.2674 ot 2025 irtf. iT,,Ia- ?1 rr,i 2t25 a,(q 5 l 6( a .A' \1.{-::: \.J .:,1:: GRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED I