The High Court · 2025

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

2. Racharla Ganraj, S/o Late Prakash Racharla, Aged about 28 years, Occ. unemployed, Ri/o. Kodimial Mandal, Karimnagar district. ...RESPONDENT/ Victim in Crl. Petition and l.A.No. 3 ol 2025 Petition under Section 528 ol BNSS, 2023 praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records in connection with FIR No.22 of 2024 on the file of Cyber Crime Police Station, TSCSB (TS Cyber Security Bureau) and quash the same. l.A. NO: 2OF 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 stay all further proceedings including arrest of the Petitioners in connection with FIR No-22 of 2024 on the file of Cyber Crime Police Station, TSCSB (TS Cyber Security Bureau) pending disposal of the Criminal petition. ::Y l.A. NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition under Section 359 (6) of BNSS praying tha ir the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,l.e. High Court may be pleased to permit the Petitio ners/Respondent No.2/ Comp I ri rant to compromise the matter with Respondent/Petitioners in the present Crl.P. I'lo. of 2025 and pass l.A. No. 4 ot 2025 Between: Racharla Ganraj, S/o Late Prakash Racharla, Aged about 28 yeirrs, Occ. unemployed, R/o. Kodimial Mandal, Karimnagar district Pr:lrt oner/Respondent And

1. The State of Telangana, , Rep. by its Public Prosecutor. l-tigh Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad. .. Respondentr 1,:ipondent

2. Sai Prasad Kancharla, S/o Mahender, Aged about :28 years, Occ. Private Employee, R/o H.No. '12-82, Kodimial, Kodimial lr/anda (arimnagar District 3. Sadakat Khan, S/o Abdul Rauf, Aged about 38 years, i)cc private Employee, R/o Taumikpur Village, Haliyapur mandal, Amethi ll istrict. Uttar Pradesh State

4. Mohammad Abid Hussain Ansari, Sio Mohammed ll::simul quadri, Aged about 44 ygap, Qcc Private Employee, R/o. Sr 50/1a, flumaisa Height F-lai- 304, lane No.24, Bhagoday, Pune District, [\llaharastra S t:rte. . . Respondents/ Petitior ers / Al to 43 Petition under Section 359 (2) of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated rn the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, :lre High Court may be pleased to record the compromise statement and to quash t re FIR No.22 of 2024 on the file of Cyber Crime Police Station, TSCSB (TS Cybe r Security Bureau) in view of the compromise entered between the F,etitioner and 2nd Respondent/Complainant in the interest of justice. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing tlre lr/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the argume rts of Sri B. KEERTHI REDDY ,Advocate for the Petitioner in Crl.Petition and l,\.No. 3 of 2025 and Respondent Nos.2 to 4 in l.A.No. 4 of 2025 and Asst. p;blic prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 in all Petitions and of Sr Swamy Venkatesh, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2 in Crl.Petition and Ll\. rlo. 3 of 2O2S and Petitioner in l A. No 4 of 2025 The Court made the following COMMON ORDER: "w I l THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA l.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 in/and CRIMINAL PETITION No.7148 o12025 COMMON ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitionersiaccused Nos.1 to 3 under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.22 of 2024 on the file of the Cyber Crime Police Station, TSCSB, registered for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 420, 506, 382, 342,370 of the IPC and Section 66D of the ITA Act, 2008, 24EA.

2. lt is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 as well as respondent No.2lde facto complainant that during pendency of the present Criminal Petition, the parties have compromised the matter and accordingly, l.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 have been filed to record compromise between them and to compound the offences

3. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor has opposed the said compromise petitions.

4. Perused the affidavits filed by lhe de facto complainant in l.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2025 which disclose that he has willingly 2 crtP 7 tlt| 2025 consented for compromise. Since the parties werr: willing to enter into compromise, they were given a chance to setilr: the matter by appearing along with their respective counsel before the High Court Legal Services Committee for the State of Telangtana ylde orders dated 30.06.2025 passed by this Court. The Secretrry, High Court Legal Services Committee shall identify the partirrs and submit a report to that effect.

5. Pursuant to the above said direction issued I y this Court, the parties along with their respective counsel have aplte;lred before the High Court Legal Services Committee for the State cf felangana and the Secretary of the above said Authority identified lhe parties and submitted a report daled 14.07.2025 stating that th-. parties were identified and they have willfully and without any c,oercion entered into compromise as per the terms of compromise.

6. ln view of the above, LA.Nos.3 and 4 of 2O2t are allowed. Consequently the Criminal Petition is allowed and il^e proceedings in Crime No.22 of 2024 on the file of the Cyber Crinr_. police Station, TSCSB, registered against the petitioners/accusecj llos. j to 3 are hereby quashed subject to the petitioners/accusecl llos.1 to 3 are paying an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the ::1 I i ! I 3 ElD J Crlp 7t18 2a)5 Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) to the Telangana High Court Advocates Association, Hyderabad, within a period of two (02) weeks from today and file proof of the same before the Registry. 7 . Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed. SD/- N.CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1 2 3 4 E 6 The Vl Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Nampally, Hyderabad. The Station House Officer , Cyber Crime Police Station' TSCSB, Hyderabad Two CCs to Pubtic Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (OUT) One CC to SRl. B. KEERTHI REDDY Advocate [OPUC] One CC to SRI SWAMY VENKATESH, Advocate IOPUC] Two CD Copies (along rvith a copy of joint mento of compromise) Nole: folal amounl ofRs. 10,000i- ( Rupees Ten Thousand only ) has been paid by Ms B' Kcerthi Redd1,. counsel lbr the Petitioner as directed b1, the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 09-09-2025 as Rs. 5,0001( Rupees Five Thousand only) to the secretary, iligh court Legal Services Committce, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad and Rs. 5.000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) to the Tclangana High court Advocates Association, HyJcrabad and filcd Memo of compliance USR No. 108 l4l of 2025 dated 26-09-2025. ./: ,! \ 1) BIT M t I t T HIGH COURT DATED:09/09/2025 COMMON ORDER I.A. NOS.3 AND 4 0I.'2025 IN/AND CRL.PETITION No.7148 ot 2025 ALLOWING THE CRL.PIITITION ANI) I.A. NOS.3 AND 4 0t 2025 O 4,/, /b /n /1 ! / 1 -:?t&^ FSr .,- :::_:.4 :.: .1 ,..,/ ,,HIGI{ COURT FORTHE STATE OF T!"LANGANA AT }TYDERABAD I.A. No. OF 2025 IN Between: Crl.P.No. oF 2025

1. Sai Prasad l(ancharla, S/o Mahender' ' ln.O ufro"t 28 years; Opc: Private Eraployee' R/"o. H.No. 12-82, Kodimial' -Kotlirrial Mandal, Karimnagar District'

2.' Sadakat Khan S/o Abdul Rauf' " 38 years, Occ: private Employee' eg"i wl,i""*Lp"ivittug", Haliyapur mandal' Amethi District, Uttar Pradesh State' "fr"-t

3. Mohammad Abid tlussain Ansari S/o Mohammed Hasimul quadri' " 44 years, Occ: Private Ernployee' ag"a IUo. Sr 50/14, Rumarsa Height F1at304' lane No'24' ei',ogoaoy, Pune District' Maharastra State' ^U"-t ... Petitionels/A1 to .A3 Ar.rd l. Tlrc State of Telangana, Ren. bv its Public Prosecutor' Hi;h (:ourt lor thc State olTelangana at ilyderabad.

2. Racharla Ganraj S/o Late Prakash Racharla' - Ln.JuUou, 28 years' Occ: unemployed' nio. rioai*irl Mandal' Karimnagar district' . ...ResPondcnt/Victim .IOINT MEM O FIL ED BY BOTH THE P AR TIES It is submitted that the Petitioner and the 2nd Respondent/Complainant were cornpromiscd ln terms of cotnpromise Pelltion and the 2nd respondclll has no objection for quashing the proceedings in FIR No 22 of 2024 on the fi1e of Cyber CrimePoliceStation,TSCSB(TSCyberSecurityBureau)intheinterestofjustice and pass such other ,lrdcr.or orders as this Hon'ble Coufi r1:t:tns fit and proper in,ih "L/ "k k-:*i lac'?'& P,. titioner No. 1 .ttfTfii ew P. ritioner No.2 y,,<0. Abi l)- AtJ^'' t Pititioner No.3 circumstances of the case $\[- Counsel for the Petitioner #Ior the Counsel Place: Hyderabad Date: \1 -06-2025 Respondent No.2 L R r)s londent No.2