The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the crrcumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to CC No. 88612024 in Crime No. 19712024, on the file of Special Judge for SC/ST (POA) ACT/Addl. Sessions Judge Court at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District., for the alleged offences U/sections 504, 506 IPC 3 (1) (r) (s), 3(2) (va) SC/ST ACT - 1989 against the petitioner herein, the Charge Sheet and all other incidental proceedings arising out of the said CC No. 88612024 on the file of Special Judge for SC/ST (POA) ACT/Addl. Sessions Judge Court at L.B.Nagari Ranga Reddy District., the Charge Sheet and other incidential proceedings, be Quashed against the Petitioner/Accused No.2 in the interest of justice. l.A. NO: 2 OF 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 of all further proceedings in CC No. 88612024 in Crime No.197 of 2024, dated 18.O5.2024 filed U/sections 504, 506 lPC, 3 (1) (0 (s), 3(2) (va) SC/ST ACT -1989 against the petitioner herein on the file of Special Judge for _-__, 7 SC/ST (POA) ACT/Addl Sessions Judge Court at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District, pursuant to file of the Charge Sheet, including the arrest and personal appearance of the Petitioners/Accused No. 2 herein. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri. MOHAMMED ABDUL RASHEED, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.'l & 2 . The Court made the following ORDER: '-f-ov o ' lo-,r5 q)q/-">r I THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10887 ot 2025 ORDER:- 1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.2 in C.C.No.8B6 of 2024, on the file of the learned Special Judge for trial of cases under SCs/STs (POA) Act / Additional Sessions Judge Court at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 354(8), 323, 504,506 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va) of SCiST Act, 1989.

2. Heard Sri Mohammed Abdul Rasheed, Iearned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.2 as well as Sri Jitender Rao Veeramalla, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent Nos.l & 2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is the owner of the land in Sy.No.54lE and that he filed a suit for injunction on 18.04.2024 and obtained an injunction order against the defacto complainant. While the defacto complainant has filed a Writ Petition but could not obtain any orders. Thus, out of grudge, to settle the scores in the civil matter, he filed the present complaint on 2 EfD) C.t P.No.70887 2025 I

15.05.2024 alleging false offences against the petitioner herein. He further submitted that according to the complaint, the alleged offence occurred one month prior to lodging of complaint i.e., on 15.05.2024. Thus, it is an afterthought of the defacto complainant to settle the matter. Hence. prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the pendency of the civil suit is no point for consideration in the criminal proceedings. He further submitted that when there is a complaint and if allegations are disclosed with regard to criminality, then the criminal proceedings are maintainable and it is for the police to investigate and it is for the cdminal court to ascertain the truth in the complaint, but it cannot be quashed away just because the civil proceedings are pending before the Court

5. Perused the record. The petitioner has filed copies of the suit pending before the Trial Court and also the copy of the Sale Deed and other documents. His contention is that when er civil matter is pending and when there is an injunction in his favour, criminal proceedings cannot be invoked against him. He relied upon a decision reported in the case of Doddapaneni Umamaheswar Rao and 3 ITD,) CtLPNa1Aa7 2d25 others Vs.Navuru copal Reddy and anotherl wherein, Para g of the said Judgment reads as under:- "The matter which essentially involves dispute of civil nature shauld not be allowed to become subject matter of criminal proceedings which may be resofted to as a shotl cul to execution ol a non-existent decree". Complaint filed making allegations of cheating against the appellants whereas the case in fact involved civil dispute relating to a contract. ln such event the High Couri ought to have exercised its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C."

6. By observing so, the learned Judge of this High Court has quashed the proceedings against the petitioner in the said case.

7. ln Kathyayini v. Sidharth P.S. Reddy2, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that pendency of civil proceedings on the same subject matter, involving the same parties, is no justification to quash the criminal proceedings if a prima facie case exists against the accused persons. ln the present case, the allegations do point out the offences under Section 447, 427 read with 34 IPC against the petitioner and the matter is pending vide C.C.No.886 of 2024, on the file of the learned Special Judge for trial of cases under SCs/STs (POA) Act / Additional Sessions Judge Court at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District. Hence, in the facts and circumstances, it is / I 2012 scc online AP 1313 'z2025 LiveLaw (sc) 712 4 EfD,I Ctt.P.No.1OA87 2025 deemed approprrate to dispose of the petition dispensing with the appearance of the petitioner before the Trial Court. B. Hence, the Criminal Petition is disposed of directing the learned Trial Court to dispose of C.C.No.B86 of 2024 at the earliest However, the presence of the petitioner/accused No.2 is dispensed with before the Trial Court provided that the petitioner is represented through an Advocate on every date of hearing and that he shall be present before the Trial Court whenever he is specifically required during the course of trial.

9. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- L.VIJAYA LAXMI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR \ //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Special Judge for SC/ST (POA) ACT/Addl. Sessions Judge at L.B. Nagar, R.R. District.

2. The Station House Officer, Police Station Shankarpally, Ranga Reddy District, 3. One CC to Sri. MOHAMMED ABDUL RASHEED, Advocate [OPUC]. 4. Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT].

5. Two CD Copies TTS/PSL W /:=_=: i::\. , t/. / 30 0[I 45 \ '-., \\ /) HIGH COURT DATED: 09/09/2024; ORDER CRLP.No.10887 of 2025 CRIMINAL PETIT'ION IS DISPOSED OF sco6eu ko,