High Court · 2025

prayino that in the circumstances b"ro*Os of Criminal Fetition' the High Court may stated in the Memorand'* "t be oleased to call for tn"''*"IOt t"lating-to the,charoe sheqt in C C'No 340 of 2015 on the file or tn" rTrr'"rili;;;!ii;; illasistrate, c"yueraoid at Havathnasar' and quash the proceedings thereon l.A. NO: 10F 2016 cRLPM P. NO: 640 30F2016) ^C . Petition under Section 482 o'f Cr'P 'C. p9yinn that in the circumstances stated in the Memorand'#"rt"ro*ot-oi C'inrinlr Fetition' the High Court may be oleased to grant .try oi'ui'tu"rtiJi'il""uaingr,includinq the appearance of the ;;'i;; rir" oi tr'" Vll tietropolitan Masistrate' oetitioner in c.c.No.340 "i;;i; Lill",.a[;i;iH;vrin""g", ffio-ini o'tpotal or the criminal Petition' This Petition coming on for hearing' upon perusing the Memorandum 'of "anjirpon n"rling'ft,. arouments of sri V. Kiranmayr' Grounds of criminar petitio'n reoresenting Smt. Veduta"Ci.,i,rrf"[tl, AdvocJte for tie Petitioners and the Sri M' Vivekananda Reody, Assili""i p'oiil Prosecutor.on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of sri Azeez HJ..li;,'rlir"."niing sri J. prabhakar, Advocate for the Respondent No.2. Crimin al Petiti on No. 1892 of 2021 Between: 2 .H. R/o. AND No. 1 8-8-485/66/8, rrr"*, Ji eij,"or=r, riri'"r, oro 't. Haleema Mohd Kamil,. Dfo: lale Mohd Kamit, Aged about 61 years, Occ: [ffi:rt:: f,/o H No.e-q-atiiqq,-'ni".)l'6oro"y, rorichowki, Gorconda Asma Begum, W/o. Late Mohd Abid, Aged about 32 years, Occ: Housewife, Syed tzaz, S/o. Hussain. nq9! aogut;/;;;. o;; car Driver. R/o. H.No.e_ 4-61 I 1 44, Meraz Cotony, fo'iicfrowti t tatg,;"., ;rri"lr O"O ...petitioners/Accused A1. A2 & A4 Ii:"r:fi: or relangana' Rep bv its pubtic prosecutor, High court at Mohammed Zahed, s/o. Litg y_".!q Kamit, Ased ,0"r, uu ["".r3,.31i"1r,rr," Rr/o H No. s-4-01t141 nr"i"l''c"r"rl,, rorichowki, Gorconda, EffJ:Jffi ...RespondenUDefacto Complainant -4g2 of Cr. p.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Ground. "i ciri#i"li petition, the High court ,ay &fJ:,T,T li,X::IJ[:3;,];;"1o6 ;loii"",'ii" ri,e orinu u,v',"ir,i,g;,. , s petition under Section 2 1 l.A. NO: 1 oF 2021 Petition under Section This Petition comino on for hoari^^ ,,^^_ _ -4g2 of Cr.p.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of-Ground. cn#i"li petition, the High court may "i be preased to orant stav oJ arr rrrtnu,^ piolrJi"n., ," c.c. No 340 0f 2015 0n the fite of the HavathnagarF s cvo"rr[rj,'ii".ii"n',i;ro"sar of tho main crr. petition. Groundsorc.r,ii,rili;ilIL:lot",,riiT*?;.!ii35,"ffi ::,li1s:il.lillffi ;: representing Smt. vedura chitrareliha, aa"o"i" f",- the petitioners and the Sri M. Vivekananda Reddy, Assistant puotic prol;;;,;;'". behatf of the Respondent H:.Hf,Tl i;'.1""' H ussa in''."p,."'"ntin!"6,.i'i. p.r or,r rr. ni,""r,Ji"i *," The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER ON,BL E H SRI JUS TICE J.s REE NIV AS 9o f20 L6 189 2ol 2021 c ALP ET ITION Nos' 550 coMMO NO RD ER: These two Criminal Petitions have been hled under Section 482 of ttre Code of Criminal Procedure' 1973 (fot short,'Cr'P'C'')' seeking to quash the charge sheet in C'C' No.34O of 2Ol 5 on the file of the VII Metropolitan Magistrate, CYberabad at Hayathnagar against the petitioners, who were arrayed as accr. sed Nos' l to 4' learned counsel' 2. Heard Sri V'Kiranmayr' representing Srnt'Vedula Chitraiekha' learned counsel for tkre petitioners, Sri Azeez Hussain' learned cor'rnsel' J.Prabhakar, Iearned Senior Counsel representing Sri behalf of resPondent No'P and Sri ReddY, learned Assistant Public appearing on behalf of respondent No'1-State appearing on M.Vivekananda Prosecutor in both the crirninal Petitions'

3. Learned counsel for the petltloners subrnitted ttrat the petitioners have not committed any offence and they were falsely irnplicated in the present crirne' Even according to the allegations rnade in the cornplaint and in the charge sheet, the ingred'ients of Sections 463 ' 464 ' 2 -r-_ 46a, 42O, 5Cr6 r/w 34 of IpC and Section 156(3) of Cr.p.C. are not attracted against the petitioners and entire a-llegations levelled against the petitioners are pureiy civil in nature. Hence, the initiation of the proceedings against the petitioners is a clear abuse of the process of law and the same is liable to be quashed.

4. per contra, respondent No.2 learned counsel appearing on behalf of submitted that the grounds raised by the petitioners have to be adjudicated after a full_fledged trial only There are no grounds to seek quashing of the proceedings, especially since in this case the evidence of pWs. I to 4 has already been completed and the learned Magistrate has issued summons to LWs.6 to 10. At this juncture, the petitioners cannot seek quashing of the proceedings.

5. The very sarne grounds were reiterated by the learned Assistant public prosecutor.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioners by way of reply subrnitted that petitioners, presence before the triai co.. rt may be dispensed with.

7. Taking into submissrons made bY ttre resPective Parties ' consideration ttre above said without 3 expressing any view on ttre merits of the case ' ttre appearance of the petitioners / acctlsed Nos'l to 4 in C'C' No.34O of 2Ol5' on ttre file of the VII Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Hayatkrnagar' is dispensed with' unless their presence is specifically reqlrired during the co,rse of trial, subject to condition that they shall be represented tkrrough their counsel on each and every adjournment' ln case of non-app earaflce of the petitioners on the specifrc dates so fixed by the trial court for their appearance, the trial court is entitled to proceed with the matter in accordance with law' a. with the above said direction' both the criminal petltlons are disPosed of' Pending miscellaneous applications' if any' shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY'/ d/. V. HARI PRASAD EPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, 1 2 3 4 E 6 AIITk The Vll MetroPolitan Magistrate Court CYberabad at ayathnagar The Station House Office r, Hayathnagar Police Stati on, Cyberabad District Two CCs to the Public P rosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hvderabad. [OUTI :j1"" #I; i;I. ieduta chitralekha' Advocate [oPUC] 5r# & i" sti i. Prabhakar, Advocate toPUCl Two CD CoPies HIGH COURT DATED:0 2t}gtzL2s t. a) COMMON ORDER CRLP.Nos.SSO9 of 2016and 1892 of 202 1 t 1; i,J --i:=_ ,,r r;r l. 'l) .'i." ,.\ \,} [P ?$?5 i -:1 ,.;., t i i)l ltr-,;.r1,.-; -'l/' t DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITIONS