The High Court · 2025

Mr. Karan Kumar. Nagla,, S/o Sri Narayana Lai Nagla, Aged 31 years, Occ Business, R/o H.No.14-3-309, Gosharirahal, Hydeiabad- ...RESPONDENT NO:2 /DEFACTo.coMPLAINANT ...RESPONDENT NO.1 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 call for the records relating to CC 10684 of 2024 pending on the file of the Honble Xll TH Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, At Nampally and quash the proceedings againdt the petitioner/Accused No.g therein, in the interests of justice l.A. NO: 2OF 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 dispense with the appearance of the petitioner/Accused No.8 in further proceedings in CC 10684 of 2024 on the file of the Hon'ble Xll TH Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, At Nampally. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri SUDHAKAR REDDY CHALLA .Advocate for the petitioner and Smt. iihalini Saxena the Assistant Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent \o.1. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No .12109 of 2025 ORDER: This criminal petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioner-accused No.8 in CC No'10684 of 2024 on the file of Xll Additional chlef Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad at Nampally, for the offences under Sections 420' 406' 471' 120(8)' 506 and '109 read wlth 34 lPC.

2. Heard Mr.Challa Sudhakar Reddy' learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.shalini Saxena, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent No'1-State'

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is facing false allegations leveled by the de facto complainant and that the petitioner gave.Rs 2 00 crores advance to .Company,) and G|obelink Trading Pvt. Ltd., (hereinafter referred as that the said amount was returned by the company to the petitioner herein and that he has also furnished his bank account statement which reveals the said transaction. But, unfortunately' the petitioner is alleged to have received the proceeds of crime which is not tenable. He further submitted that though the name of the petitioner "l .-\*..-.1 2 ETD,J Crl.P. No-12109 of 2025 was not referred in the FlR, in the charge sheet h rwas made as accused No.8. He further submitted that the petitirt rer has nothing to do with lVl/s. Sanav Telecom LLp and that he paic Rs.2.00 crores under loan agreement and received it back and r: has no other transaction with the said company. He further conter led that though the advance amount was received from the Corr tany, the said Company is not made as an accused in this cabe . However, the petitioner is made as an accused though there is nc role played by him in the crime and hence, prayed to quash .le proceedings against the petitioner.

4. Learned Assistant public prosecutor has submitted that the petitioner herein is accused No.8 and that tr -, police could collect information during the course of investil ltion that the accused No.2 has transferred amounts to Globelin< Company and from that company the amount was transferred to rccused No.B, who is the petitioner herein and the reason be rind the said transaction has to be elicited during the course of trial The diversion of funds, which are alleged to be proceeds of crinrr , needs to be ascertained and hence, he,prayed to,dismiss the petiti )n.

5. Perused the record. I :7 J ETO,J Crl.P. No.121Og of 2025

6. The allegations prima facle point out the offence against the petitioner. The recitars of the charge sheet do point out that on 24.02.2023 from the account of accused No.1 Company, represented by accused No.2, an amount of Rs..l ,40,00,000/_ was transferred and further Rs.90,00,000/- was transferred to the account of accused No.B i.e. Gauri Buildcon Limited. Another transaction is also shown from accused No..l to GlObelink Company. It is alleged that accused No.2, representing accused No..l company, conspiring with accused Nos.3 to 5 could extract Rs.4,15,35,000/- from the company of the complainant under the guise of delivering Samsung Mobile phones of 4,260 units, but with a dishonest intention evaded the delivery and further conspired with accused Nos.6 to 12 and diverted the amounts collected from the complainant-LW.1 for his personal benefits. Since the allegations are of serious nature involving huge amounts and that the diversion of funds is yet to be elicited and it can be done only during the course of trial, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the petition by dispensing with the attendance of the petitioner before the trial court.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal petition is disposed of dispensing with the attendance of the petitioner before the trial court provided he is represented by a counsel before the trial court on 4 ETD,J Crl.P. No.12109 of 2025 every date of hearing and shall appear before the trial court whenever his presence is required during the cortrst> :f trial It/liscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall s and closed SD/. A.H-S GOWRI SHANKAR ASS,I TANT REGISTRAR I //TRUE COPY// a>- To, iECTION OFFICER

1. Xll TH Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate At Nampall,/ Hyderabad. Telangana

2. The Asst. Commissioner of poiice EOW Team-Vl, CCS, t l, Hyderabad 3 The SHO INSP ADM|N, DD CCS, Hyderabad. 4 One CC to SRI SUDHAKAR REDDY CHALLA Advocate OPUCI 5. One CC to SRl. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR Advocate [OpLr( ] 6- t*o CD Copies PK/PSL . n\ \Vrlr-V HIGH COURT I ... - --.--.-i-\, ii i Sii,-.\.. 'C,..\. I I ,tAN 2ri26 'l 1 i.sr^r"* -\=- a=: O r1-z/ \ _ "{ \l DATED:07/'10/2025 DISPOSSED OFF CRLP.No.12109 of 2025 i)(_(, {\s