The High Court · 2025

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

2. C.Abhishek, S/o.C.Prabhakar, Aged about 36 Years, Occ. Business, R/o. H. No.4-87, Vikas Nagar, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad. ..RESPONDENTS/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 Proceedings in C.C.No 1537 of 2024 in Crime No.595 of 2023, dated 04.05.2023 for the offences under Section 447, 427 ,506 l. P.C., on the file of Hon'ble X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Kukatpally. 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 of all further Proceedings in C.C.No.'1537 of 2024 in Crime No.595 of 2023, daled 04.05.2023 for the offences under Section 447,427,506 l.P.C., on the file of Hon'ble X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Kukatpally pending disposal of the Criminal petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri RApOLU BHASKAR' Advocate for the petitioner and rvtr. JTTHENDER RAo vEERAMALLA, the Additional public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No 1 and None appeared for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER I I I I rHE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKI'1AMJI CRIMINAL PETIT roN No.7950 OF 20:15 ORDER This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (tor short 'BNSS, 2023') seeking quashmenl of the proceedings in C.C.No.1537 of 2024 cn the file of the X Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, at Kukatpally, against the petitioner.

2. I have heard Mr. Rapolu Bhaskar, learr;ed counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No. 1-State.

3. The petitioner is arrayed as an accused in C.C.No.1537 of 2024 for the offences under Sections 447,427 and 506 of lndian Penal Code, 1860.

4. The prosecution's case, in brief, is that the respondent No.2 / the de facto cornplainant, lodged a police report alleging that on

04.05.2023 at approximately 3:30 p.m., the petitioner, accompanied by associates and utilizing a JCB bearing registration number AP098P7060, along with other equipment, tents, and a movable container home bearing number TS12UD9248, unlawfully entered the complainant's property. This act allegedly took place against the '--:r 2 NTR J CRLP 7950 2025 backdrop of ongoing civil disputes, including a status quo order dated

08.06.2023, and interim applications pending in l A. No 609 of 2022 in O.S. No. 392 of 2022. lt is further claimed that the petitioner caused damage to certain structures, intimidated the complainant's relative and watchman, and forcibly took possession of their mobile phones. Accordingly, a formal complaint was filed.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the criminal proceedings are a product of malice, asserting that the petitioner has been falsely implicated due to the aforementioned civil disputes. lt is argued that no such incident occurred and that the complaint has been orchestrated solely to exert undue pressure on the petitioner by imparting a criminal colour to a civil disagreement. Learned counsel further asserts lhat, even if the complaint's allegations are accepted at face value, the essential ingredients of the alleged offences are not satisfied. Therefore, continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of the judicial process, justifying a plea for quashing the case.

6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the de facto complainant has filed a detailed and specific report, including registration numbers of the machinery allegedly brought by the petitioner to the scene_ The complainant also duly mentioned the existence of the ongoing disputes. Moreover, the investigation, supported by eyewitness statements, has revealed 3 NTR J CRLP 7950 2025 sufficient prima facie material indicating the occurrence of the alleged incident. Hence, the Additional Public Prosecutor argues that factual adjudication is necessary, and the petitioner's request for quashment is devoid of merit.

7. I have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of the learned counsel. I \ \

8. ' A perusal of the police report, along with the statements of the eyewitnesses recorded during the investigation, indicates that the alleged incident occurred on 04.05.2023 at approxrmately '1 1:00 p.m. The witness statements are consistent with the allegations detailed in the police report and support the occurrence of the incident as I I described. There is nothing in the record that suggests any exculpatory circumstance or provides a basis to infer that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. lt is a well-settled principle of law that, at the stage of considerng a petition for quashment under Section 528 of the BNSS, the Court is not to evaluate the truthfulness or reliability of the evidence collected during the investigation. The veracity or sufficiency of the material is a matter to be adiudicated during trial. ln view of the prima facie material available on record that supports the prosecution's case, any interference with the criminal proceedings at this stage would be unwarranted and legally untenable. Accordingly, no justification is found for quashing the proceedings. I I 4

9. For the aforesaid reasons, in the absence of merit, this petition is liable to be and is accordingly dismissed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed SD/- A, JAYAS //TRUE COPY// ISTANT REG R CTION OFFICER To,

1. The X Additional Metropolitan ft/agistrate, Cyberabad at Kukatpally. 2. The Station House Officer, Gachibowli Police Station, Cyberabad. 3. One CC to Sri. Rapolu Bhaskar, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CCs to Sri. Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana I

5. Two CD Copies w GR/gh \ HIGH COURT DATED:01 10712025 'iire s r,{ 16 ( J .:, J t. 2 i l1[T 2025 "t& Dr--S:1,111-rr9t ..i' ORDER CRLP.No.7950 of 2025 THE CRIMINAL PETITION iS DISMISSED l @ aq fqlw