The High Court · 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 quash the complaint filed by the 2nd Respondent vide impugned complaint in Spl. S.C. No. 34 of 2023 on the file of the Vl Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge Court, Secunderabad and the consequential summons issued by the Learned Judge dated. 11l0ll2O23 against the Petitioner as clear abuse of process Of Court. l.A. NO: 1OF 2023 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 all further proceedings in impugned complaint filed by the 2nd Respondent vide impugned complaint Sp. S.C. No. 34 of 2023 on the file of the Vl Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad including the appearance of the Petitioner pending disposal of the above Crl. P. I I I I I I I ! i I I l.A. NO: 2 OF 2023 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Mernorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to exteFd the interims stay granted by this Hon'ble Court in Crl. p. No. 7110 of 2O23, dated. 23-1 1-2023 until further orders. l.A. NO: 1OF 2024 Petition u,rder Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying tha. in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal petition, the High Court may be pleased to exter d the interim stay granted by this Hon'b e Court in Crl. p. No. 711O ol 2023, daled 2710312024 until further orders. l.A. NO: 1OF 2025 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying thal n the circumstances stated in the Menrorandum of Grounds of Criminal petition, the High Court may be pleased to extend the interim stay granted by this Hon'b e Court in Crl. p. No. 7110 0f 2023, dated 30lol/2025. This Petiticn coming on for hearing, upon perusinr; the [\Iemorandum of Grounds of Crim nal Petition and upon hearing the argum(_,nts of Sri K. Rajanna, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri E. Ganesh, Assistan. public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri Ch.Buchi Raju, f:r the Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER B THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL PETITION No.711O OF 2o23 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner herein seeking to quash the proceedings against him in Spl.S.C.No.34 of 2023, pendrng on the file of VI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge Court at Secunderabad.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner, who is working as Deputy Manager in Midhani, used to harass the de-facto complainant, who is working as a Lab Testing Operator in Midhani, also used to degrade him in filthy language in the name of his caste. It is stated that though previous complaint filed by the de-facto complainant i.e., FIR No. 59 ol 2O2O was closed stating that the complaint was filed with false and fictitious allegations, the de-facto complainalt filed a protest petition before the trial Court without issuing any notice to the petitioner and the same was numbered as SpLSC. No. 34 of 2023, for the offences punishable under Section 3(1)(q)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (POA) Act and Section 506 of the IPC.

3. Heard Sri K. Rajanna, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri E.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing _[qf the 2 EW,J C.LPNo.71)0 of 2023 .4 respondent N(). I State and Sri Ch.Buchi Raju. learned counsel appearing for r':spondent No.2

4. lrarned cour-rscl for the petitioner frstly contended that the de-facto compl;rinant besides not working properly under the pretext of ill health, also used to mismanage with the petitioner. He secondlg contended that instead of approaching the higlrer authorities for shifting from the department to any other department on the ground of his ill-health, lhe de-facto complainant hled complaint against the petitioner rvith false and fabricated allegations. tn this regard, he placed reliance on thc judgments of Apex Court in Karuppud.ayar Vs. State represented bg the Deputg Superintendent of Pollce, Lalgudi Trichg and Orsl, and prayed the Court to allow the Criminal Petition by quashing the proceedings against the pet tioner.

5. On the otl'rer hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the submission:; made bl, the learned counsel for thr: petitioner stating that there are serious allegations against the petitioner and a detailed trial has to be conducted in order to elicit the facts tf the case and as such, interferen :'e of this Court, at this stage, is not warranted. Hence, he prayed the C,rurt to dismiss the Criminal Petition. | 2024 Law Surt (S(:) 1108 ..* ) EWJ CrLP.No.711O of 2023

6. In view of the above, this Court, having respectable agreement with the views taken by the Apex Court in Karuppudagar Vs. State represented bg the Deputg Superlntendent of Police, Lalgudi T-richg o'nd Ors (Supra), is of the considered opinion that even if the trial is conducted, no purpose would be served as there is no corroborative evidence to prove the alleged offence against the petitioner. Therefore, the proceedings against the petitioner deserve to be quashed. 7; Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner in Spl.S.C.No.34 of 2023 on the hle of VI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge Court at Secunderabad, are here by quashed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed //TRUE COPY// A SD/- T. JAYASREE PUTY REGISTRAR S CTION OFFICER To, DL 1 . The Vl Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, at Secunderabad. 2. The Station House Officer, Kanchanbagh Police Station, Hyderabad 3. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, State of Telangana, High Court Buildings, at Hyderabad (OUT)

4. One CC to Sri K Rajanna, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Sri Ch.Buchi Raju, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies HIGH COURT DATED:.1210312025 I I ORDER CRLP.No.7'110 of 2023 ) o 1HE -cT4 ,c ,c ( 'l7 APB nn * ,ATcHr''O t (n( z a ALLOWNG THE CRIMINAL PETITION o I L P