The High Court · 2025

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

2. Kusuma Devi Kanumuri @Pinnamraju Kusuma Devi, D/o Kishan Kanumuri, aged about 40 years, Occ Life Coach, R/o Block- 4, Flat No. 506, My Home Krish, Gachibowli, Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Sectibn 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 Cr. 178t2025, dt 31- 01- 2025, lJts 69, 31S (4) 117 (1).351 (2) of BNS Act, in P.S Cyberabad Commissionerate, Gachibowli, against the Petitioner/Accused 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 grant Stay in Cr. 17812025, dt 31-01-2025, U/s 69, 318 (4) 117 (1), 351 (2) of BNS Act, in P. S. Cyberabad Commissionerate, Gachibowli, in favour of the Petitioner, while pending disposal of said Petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing tte Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the argumenl: of smt V Anuradha chakravarthi ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri. Jithender rlao veeramalla, the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Responde,r t No. 1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2 The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVTEADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.9780 OF 2025 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.178 of 2O2S on the file of p.S. Cyberabad, Gachibowli, registered for the offences under Seclions 69, 31 8(4), 1 17 (1), 351 (2) of The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNS, 2023").

2. Heard the submissions of Smt. Anuraadha Chakravarthy, learned counsel for the petitioner and,sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 - State.

3. The learned petitioner counsel has submitted that the allegations under Section 69 BNS does not get attracted in the present case and that it was a consensual relationship. Therefore, it cannot be treated as an offence under Section 6g of the BNS. He further submitted that there is no element of cheating, much less to attract the offence undei Section 31S(4) of the BNS. Therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public prosecutor has submitted that the criminal petition filed by the petitioner herein on an earlier i \ 2 ETD,J Crlp.No.9760_2025 occasion got dismissed vide orders dated i 8.O3.2OZS in Crl.P.No.4287 of 2025. The petitioner has not mentior rd any change in circumstances to file a second quash petition. He urther submits that the petition lacks merits, and hence prayed to disr riss the same.

5. Perused the record.

6. The Criminal Petition No.42B7 of 2025 was dr missed as not pressed, granting liberty to file an appropriate applic;rl on afresh, the petitioner has mentioned about the said fact in his al idavit. One of the ground raised by the petitioner is that Crl.p.No .r 48 of 2025 is filed seeking bail. One of the Single Bench has obser ued that there is a consensual relationship in between the petitiorr r and the de- facto complainant and the bail was granted subl, ,ct to certain conditions. Thus, the petitioner counsel has strongly t cntended that there is no truth in the allegations and there is no p-i na-facie case against the petitioner. The investigation is still in progre >D.

7. The petitioner counsel contends that it was or y a business transaction which is disclosed from an undertaking ex :cuted by the de-facto complainant. The said copy of the undertakirl is filed along with the petition, which discloses that the de-facto co nplainant has given undertaking that she is a Certified Life Coacir and that she I 1 ETD.J Crlp.M.9780_2025 wanted to establish her own Meditation Centre and out of good acquaintance with the petitioner herein, she has invested into a venture by name Tapasvi Foundation, invested Rs.25 lakhs into the venture and later on, after a considdrable period due to her requirement, she has taken back Rs.10 lakhs for her personal needs and that too without any undue influence or coercion for which the petitioner herein is not accountable for the same. The contention of the counsel is that it was only a business acquaintance between the ) \ petitioner herein, and the de-facto complainant, and nothing more than that and there is no such offence alleged to have been t committed by the petitioner herein against the de-facto complainant. He has not abused the de-facto complainant physically at any point of time.

8. The contents of the complaint do point out that the de-facto complainant is a single mother with two daughters and that the petitioner was her client, he has not revealed his rnarital status and has developed intimacy with her by proposing that he would marry her. After a considerable period of the said relationship, he revealed that he is a married man with three children, but he was living separately from his wife for 4 years and his divorce was underway. Subsequently, he changed his stand that he will never divorce his 4 DTD,J Crip.No.9780 2025 wife and has repeatedly threatened and abused her I hysically. Thus, the allegations point out prima-facie case againr; the petitioner herein for the offences under Sections 69, 318(4), . t(1), 351(2) of the BNS. Therefore, the petition lacks merits. g ln the result, the Criminal petition is dismissed ,lo costs Miscellaneous apprications pending, if any, shar stand crosed. //TRUE COPYII 'i!ll ,+i[fH$,!,.RiI .)- \-."r' SECTTON OFFICER To, 3

4. 5. 1 The X Additio nal Metropolitan Magistrate Kuka tpally, at F'r rshanth Nagar, Cyberabad Ranga Redd y District The Statio nHouse Officer, Police Station Gachibowli Cy I rrabad Two CCs to the Public prosecutor, High Court of Telangar t, Hyderabad.(ouT) One CC to Smt V Anuradha Chakravarthi Advocate [Op _ ] Two CD Copies .l w I i t 't' - ''==-.-::--. :: :;it Sf4l /": r lg ir0 mf -\ / I HIGH COURT DATED:0711012025 ORDER CRLP.No.9780 of 2025 CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISMISSED @ €