Further, he relied on the decision of the Honble supreme court in Abhijit pawar v. Hemant Madhukar Nimbalkar and anotherr, wherein it is held that ttre procedure co

4. Tejasri, Wo. Satish Babu, Aged about 34 years, Occ: House hold, Rlo.2-2- S. yedla Mallesh, S/o. Not Known, Aged about 58 years, Occ: Business' R/o. 1 BblZ4 l3O/A, Mallikarj una N agar, Amberpet, Hyderabad. (Dau ghter) Kothirampur, Karimnagar. (Brother-in-law)

6. A Swathi, Wo. A. Shyam Sundar, Aged about 40 years, Occ: House hold, - R/o. Near Basti Dawakhana (Health & Wellness Centre), TRT Ward Office, Gandhinagar, RTC X Road, Hyderabad. (Niece)

7. A. Shyam Sundar, S/o. A. Yadagiri, Aged about'44 years, Occ: Pvt' Employee, R/o. Near Basti Dawakhana (Health & Wellness Centre), TRT Ward Office, Gandhinagar', RTC X Road, Hyderabad' (Son) ' AND ...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 1 to 7

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, at Hyderabad.

2. N. Roiamani, Wo. Late Swami, Aged about 48 years, Occ: House wife, R/o H. trto. 2-Z- t 85 124 t 18/B, M all ikarj u na N agar, Am berpet, Hyderabad. ...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 pleased to quash the C.C. No. 7os1t2o24 on the file of the lV Additional chief Judicial Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad' l.A. NO: 1 OF 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 grant stay of all further proceedings including the appearance of the Petitioners/Accused No. 1 to 7 in C.C. No. 765112024 on the file of the lV Additional Chiel Judicial Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad pending disposal of the above Criminal Petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Cr minal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri. KARAM CHENDU KOMiIREDDY, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Sri. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Aclditional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of None appeared for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following ORDER: i) HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.2781 of 2O2S ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by petitioners/accused Nos:1 to 7 under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS) seeking quashment of proceedings against them in C.C.No.7651 of 2024 on the file of the learned IV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, at Nampally, Hyderabad for the offences alleged under Sections 323, g54, 447,5O6 r/w 34 of I.P.C.

2. Heard Mr.Karam Chandu Komireddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned Magistrate has not assigned any reasons while passing the cognizance order dated O2.O8.2O24 and taking against the petitioners/accused Nos.l to 7 for the atleged offences. $e states that Section 2O2 of Cr.P.C. empowers a 1 ,, Magistrate to inquire into a complaint or direct an investigation before issuing summons to the accused persons who resides outside the jurisdiction of the Magistrate concerned. Further, he relied on the decision of the Honble supreme court in Abhijit pawar Vs. Hemant Madhukar Nimbalkar and anotherr, wherein it is held that ttre procedure contemplated under section 2o2 of cr.P.c. has to be mandatorily followed by a Magistrate.

4. Learned Additional public prosecutor submits that if the order passed by the Magistrate is not upto the satisfaction of this court, appropriate orders.be passed in this Criminal Petition.

5. J'he order dated 02.O9.2O24 is extracted as hereunder:- "Heard the learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record. The complainant heiself got r:xamined as witness and the entire record primafacie r;hows the allegations against Accused No.l to 7 for the ..PC. Hence cognizance is taken for the offences U /sec.447,323,354 and 506 of IPC against accused No.1 to 7 i.e. Al.Uppula Satish BabL, A2.N.Narayana, I lZOtZy:J Supreme Court Cases 52g I I I 3 A3.Uppula Lakshmi, A4.Tejasri, A5.Yedla Mallesh, 4,6.A.Swathi, AT.A.Shyam Sundar Register as CC No.765112024. Issue summons to A1 to A7. Call on 16- LO-2024". As per Section L77 Cr.P.C. every offence shall \ \ 6 ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed. However', the Magistrate has to assign reasons while taking cognizance. The learned Magistrate ought to have assigned valid reasons while passing the order dated O2.O8.2O24 and taking cognizance against the petitioners for the alleged offences.

7. Therefore, the order dated O2.O8.2O24 in C.C.No.7651 of 2C24 on the file of the learned IV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the trial Court for fresh consideration, in accordance with law.

8. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is disposed of. It is made clear, the learned Magistrate shall not be influenced by the observations made by this Court. F-' \ 4

9. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. \ //TRUE COPY// SD/. B. REKHA RANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G SECTION OFFICER / To, 1 2 3 4 The lV ArJdr. chief Judiciar Magistrate, Nampary, Hyderabad. ONE CC IO Sri. KARAM CHENbU KOMIREDOV,'NJ,*AIC Two ccs, to pUBLrc pRosECUToR, H,gh c"r,t'i"Iin" state of Terangana at Hyderabad [OUT]. Two CD rlopies L o r rv' I [OPUC]. i / iEl c C) 2 2 JAtl ZoZo * HIGH COURT DATED: 25108t2025 ORDER CRLP.No.27tl1 of 202i CRIMINAL F'ETITION IS DISPOSED OF ! I :: l $t I I I !