The High Court · 2025

Prosecutor, High Court Hyderabad. .RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

2. Thokala Sugunamma, Wo Ramulu, Aged 40 years , Occ Coolie, R/o Godakondal (V), Chintapally Mandal, Nalgonda District, Telangana State ..RESPONDENT/DEFACTO-COMPLAINANT 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 quash the order dated 1'1. 09. 2025 in Crl. It/P. No. 213 ot 2025 in SC. No. 138 of 2020 on the file of the Ld. Special Fast Track Sessions Court for Expeditious Disposal of cases of Rape and POCSO Act at Nalgonda and consequently direct the Ld. Special Fast Track Sessions Court for Expeditious Disposal of cases of Rape and POCSO Act at Nalgonda to allow the petition Crl. MP No 213 ot 2025 in SC No 1 38 of 2020 l.A. NO: 1OF 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 stay all further proceedings in SC. No. 138 ot 2020 on the file of the Ld. Special Fast Track Sessions Court for Expeditious Disposal of cases of Rape and POCSO Act at Nalgonda pending disposal of the main Criminal Petition This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing fl-( N,4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the argu r ents of Sri V R lvlAcHAVARAlv ,Advocate for the petitioner and sri V.Jitherr er rao Additional Public Prosecutor on beharf of the Respondent Noi. and ()r .sri D .Narshima Advocate for the Respondent N02. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.12667 ot 2025 ORDER This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-accused seeking to set aside the order dated '1 1.0g.2025 passed in Crl.M.p. No. 2.1 3 of 2025 in SC No 'l 38 of 2O2O by the Special Judge for trial of cases under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act at Nalgonda.

2. Heard Mr.V.R. Machavaram, Iearned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1-State and Sri D. Narasimha, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the trial court has erroneously dismissed the petition filed by them under Section 7(A) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. 2000 (for short 'Juvenile Justice Act'). They have submitted before the trial court that the petitioner-accused is a minor at the time of the alleged offence and relied upon the school certificate showing the date of birth of the accused herein is '18.03.2000 and thus, prayed to consider the petitioner to be a jurgnile and transmit the case to the Juvenile Court, but the said ,t' 2 EfD,J C.l P No.12667 ol 2025 :1 petition was dismissed by the trial court causing 1l ejudice to the rights of the accused. He, therefore, prayed to set aside the impugned order

4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has submitted that at the time of commission of the offence for the flrst t r re, the juvenile is at the age of 18 years and the offence was : lntinued for a considerable time and thus, as on the date of co r plaint, he has attained majority and thus, the trial court has rightl 7 dismissed the petition. The learned counsel has relied upon the lecision of the Apex Court in Suresh v. State of Uttar Pradeshl ar< has prayed to upheld the orders of the trial court.

5. Perused the record

6. The Sessions Case is pending against the r ditioner herein for the offences under Sections 366-4 and 376 (2 t (n) IPC and Section 5 (l) read with 6 of the POCSO Act, vide SC I lo.'l 38 of 2020 on the file of Special Judge for trial of cases under t- : Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act at Nalgonda. T' : said case is pending for more than 5 years. The examination cf the witnesses was completed whereunder PWs.l to 18 were examir:d and Exs.P1 1 2o2s Lawsuit (SC) 1947 :f 3 EfD,J Crt-P. No.12667 ot 2o2s to P25 and l\llO1 was marked in evidence and when the case was posted for examination of the petitioner -accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., at that juncture, the petitioner has come up with the present petition under Section 7(A) of the Juvenile Justice Act. ln support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the original conduct and bonafide certificate of the petitioner issued by Venkateshwara Junior College. The date of birth of the petitioner is shown as'l 8.03.2000 and the SSC ce(ificate submitted by the petitioner also discloses the same date of birth as

18.03.2000. Thus, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as on the date of offence, the petitioner was a juvenile 7 The contents of the FIR and the recitals of the charge sheet point out that the accused followed the victim on the pretext of love \ and abused her sexually for which the parents of the victim warned him. But the accused has continued exploiting the victim sexually on the pretext of love for a period of four months prior to the date of the complaint i.e. 04.02.2019, that means the alleged exploitation continued till November, 2018. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that as on the date of commission of the offence the petitioner is a minor. But, it is alleged in the recitals of EfO,J cr1 P No 12667 ol2025 the charge sheet that the petitioner continued the r rlationship with the minor girl till November 2018. The accused wot- I I be completing .18 years of age as on 18.03.2018. As per the rec ta s of the charge sheet the commission of offence occurred till lr t vember, 2018. Therefore, as on the date of commission of offen<;, , the petitioner cannot be taken to be a minor Therefore, he is a m: or by that time. Hence, the contention of the learned counsel for tlt : petitioner that the petitioner is a minor as on the date of commissi: r of the offence is not tenable. Hence, the trral court has rightly dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner. There are no meri r in the present petition and hence, the same is liable to be dismissec B. Accordingly, the Criminal petitron is dismissed lrliscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand c :sed. SD/- A.H.S. iOWRI SHANKAR ASSISi' ANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// I ECTION OFFICER To, I The soecial Fast Track Sessions court for Expetl ious Disposal of cases'of Rape and POCSO Act at Nalgonda

2. The station House officer, Police station chinthapally r llgonda District 3. One CC to SRI. V R MACHAVARAM Advocate [OPUC] 4. one CC to SRl. D .Narshima Advocate for R-2 [OPUC] 5. Two CC to SRl. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR High court fol I 3 state of Telangana at HYderbad [OUT]

6. Two CD CoPies w AG/PSL }?& I \-r t 1) Si-A C) l : Jt'll ?t2t * i;:<-.-.-a\ * HIGH COURT DATED:1911112025 ORDER CRLP.No.12667 of 2025 CRLP IS DISMISSED *re W'\,, \O\'