The High Court · 2025

4. Kunaboina Srikanth, S/o Narsaiah, Aged 23 years, Occ- Employee in incredible lnfra Project Private Limited, R/o H.No. 2-69t26, Ellanthakunta Village 8s Mandal, Ranjanna Siricilla District. AND State of Telangana, Rep., by Public Prosecutor, High Court For the State of Telangana at Hyderabad ...Respondent ...Petitioners/Accused No.4 to 7 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 call for the records and quash the Charge Sheet against the Petitioners/Accused No.4 to 7 in C.C.No.1020 of 2024 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Yadadri, Yadadri-Bhuvanagiri District. l.A. NO:1O F 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 against the Petitioners/Accused No.4 to 7 in C.C.No.1020 of 2024 on the fite of Judiciat Magistrate of First Class at Yadadri, Yadadri-Bhuvanagiri District. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri M.A. Raheem, Advocate for the Petitioners and the Additional public prosecutor on behalf of the ResPondent The Court made the following; ORDER I THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DI: /I EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11071 OF 2025 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitiort rs -- accused Nos.4 to 7 seeking to quash the proceedings in () C.No.1020 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate cl First Class at Yadadri, Yadadri-Bhuvanagiri District, registered frrr the offences under Sections 286, 336 and 201 of the lndian Pe ral Code (for short "lPC") and Section 9 B (1) (b) of Explosives Ac1, "lBB4 2 Heard the submissions of Sri Papaiah Pedrl; kula, learned counsel representing Mr.M.A.Raheem, learned c r rnsel for the petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla. learred Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent

3. The learned petitioners counsel has subnr ted that the petitioners are innocent and that they never committ: l any blasting of the boulders by using explosives, and that even rf I re allegations of the complaint are considered, it is mentioned in he conrplaint that even before committing the act of explosion. t re petitioners were apprehended. Therefore, the contents of corr rlaint also do not reveal any act of usage of explosive material :r the act of ) - explosion carried on by the petitioners. He further submitted that the petitioners are the employees, and the possession of the explosive materiar may be with regard to the owners, but these people acted according to the instructions of their employers, and that they are innocent. He therefore submitted that the aregations do not get attracted against the petitioners, and hence, prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners herein.

4. The learned Additional public prosecutor has submitted that the petitioners have attempted to use the explosive substances, possessing and using the same also gets attracted as per Section 98(1) of Explosives Act.

5. Perused the record. b. Section 98 (1) of Explosives Act is extracted hereunder for the sake of reference "98, Punishment for certain offences._(1) Whoever, in contravention of rules made under section 5 o'r. tr ti.,"'ll"Inion. of a licence granted under the said rules_ (a) manufactures, imports or exports any explosrve shalt he punishable with imprisonment for a term irni"[ rnr, three years, or with fine *r,icn may-"xte;"i; ffi: inl=rrrno "rlj"o " rupees, or with both; (b) possesses, uses, sells or -transports any explosive shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term *r,i"i ,"v-"ri"nJ io ,*o -1 years or with fine which may extend to three thousand Jpees or with botht and (c) rn any other case, with fine which may exterr( to one thousand ruPees." 7 . The contents of the complaint reveal the p'r sence of the petitioners at the site and that the petitioners here r are accused Nos.4 to 7. lt is further made out from the complain hat under the instructions of the Directors of the venture, the p€ .itioners have brought the compressor tractor to the site and drilled i bout 15 holes into the rocks and loaded them with gelatin sticks a rd detonators and the connections were also made using the cct necting wires and everything was prepared for detonation, wi r n they were apprehended bY the Police. B. Thus, the allegations point out an offence tnder Section 9B(1Xb) of the Explosives Act, and the strength of the evidence can be evaluated before the trial Court. Hence, is deemed appropriate to dispose of the petition by dispett 'ing with the attendance of the petitioners before the trial Court.

9. ln the result, the Criminal Petition is disposetl of dispensing with the attendance of the petitioners before the tria I Court, unless their presence is specifically required by the trial Cc lrt during the 4 - course of trial, provided that they shall be represented by their counsel on every date of hearing. It/iscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// Sd/. M. JAWAHAR REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR .1(v' SECTION OFFICER To, District.

1. The Judicial [\4agistrate of First Class at Yadadri' Yadadri-Bhuvanagtrt Z in"" St"tlon House Officer, Yadagirigutta Police Station' 3. Two CCs to the Public p'ot""uioi' iigfr court for the State of Telangana at

4. Hvderabad. (OUT) il; cc i" sii rrll A. Raheem, Advocate [oPUCl Two CD CoPies AS/SA { i . i I l: ii i^ ,/:,, ' I llE[ 2U[ ..-. t'2 s'ry r a.,i ! HIGH COURT DATED:1610912025