The High Court · 2025

2. Srinivas Paladi, S/o Late Chandramouleshwar, Aged about 42 years, Occ Business, R/o D.No.11-4, Flat No.G4, Sai Residency, P and'T Colony, Gaddiannaram, Saroornagar, Ranga Reddy District, Teldngana.

3. Padmavathi Paladi, D/o Late Chandramouleshwar, Aged about 41 years, Occ Housewife, D.No.11-4, Flat No.G4, Sai Residenby, P and i Cotonv. Gaddiannaram, Saroornagar, Ranga Reddy District, Teiangana.

4. Paladi Rambabu, S/o Late Chandramou Business, R/o D.No.11-4, Flat No.G4, Gaddiannaram, Saroornagar, Ranga Reddy District, leshwar, Aged a Sai Residency, AND bout 38 years, Occ P and T Colony, ana. NERS/A1 TO A4 1 . The State of Telangana, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State ofTelangana At Hyderabad through SHO, Mahabubnagar Rural Police Station. Mahabubnagar

2. Sama Chandrasekhar, S/o Sama Srinivas Aged about 26 years Occ Business R/o H No 3-90 Srinivas Colony Ralla Cheruvu Thanda Avancha Village Thimmajipet Mandal Nagarkurnool District 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 in FIR No.365 of 2025 on the file of Mahabubnagar Rural Police Station, Mahabubnagar and quash the same F 202s Petition under Section 528 of BNSS raying 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 including arrest of the petitioners in connection with FIR No.365 of 2025 on the file of Mahabubnagar Rural Police Station, Mahabubnagar pending disposal of the main Criminal petition This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri BALA MURALI Y, Advocate for the petitioner and sRl JITHENDER RAo VEERAMALLA, Additional Public Prosecutor on behatf of the Respondent No.1 and None Appeared for the Respondent No.2 The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.12747 OF 2025 ORDER This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 4 seeking to quash the proceedings in FlR. No.365 of 2025 on the file of P.S. Mahabubnagar Rural, Mahabubnagar District, registered for the offences under Sections 417 and 420 rcdd with 34 of the lndian Penal Code (for short'lPC').

2. Heard the submissions of Sri Y. Bala Murali, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 - State.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that earlier one Chaluvagali Raghavendra Raju has lodged a complaint against the petitioner Nos.1 to 4 and others vide F.l.R.No.329 of 2025 for the ciffences under Sections 417 and 420 of IPC and that they have approached the High Court yrde Crl.P.No.6518 of 2025 seeking anticipatory bail and the Court has directed the Police to follow the procedure under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and also to follow the guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar ys. Sfafe of Bihal. He ' (2014) 8 scc 273 I 2 ETD,J Crlp-No.12747 2025 further submitted that the petitioners are facing false allegations. The a'egations do not attract the ingredients of sections 417 and 420 of l.p.C. Respondent No.2 filed the present complaint just to harass the petitioners herein for ulterior motives. The police have simply registered the case, without even conducting preliminary enquiry and thus, abused the process of law. He therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings.

4. The learned Additional public prosecutor has submitted that once the compliant discloses cognizable offences, the police are not required to conduct any preliminary enquiry. He rurther submitted that it is specifically alleged that the petitioners have taken money of Rs.90 rakhs and faired to handover physicar possession of the rand, thus disclosing a cognizable offence under Section 420 of lpC. He therefore, prayed to dismiss the petition.

5. Perused the record.

6. The contents of the complaint points out the prima_facie a'egations that the petitioners have promised to se, the rand to an extent of 900 square yards in Sy.Nos.232 and 233 situated in the limits of yedira to respondent No.2 and executed Doc.No.SS2g of 2O2q on 08.05.2024 by making him believe that the property is 7 / 3 ETD,J Crlp.No.l2747 2025 ancestral property and at the time of purchase of the plot, it was an open plot and when he went to the said land for fencing, it was already fenced by some others and thus, the petitioners failed to hand over physical possession of land purchased by him. Thus, prima-facie case is pointed out against the petitioners. The investigation is still in progress.

7. The petitioners' counsel contends that when the matter is of civil nature, the Police ought to have conducted preliminary enquiry before registering the FlR. !n Vinod Kumar Pandey and Another Vs. Seesh Ram Saini and Ors2, it was laid down that once cognizable offence, is disclosed from the complaint, the Police need not conduct any preliminary enquiry. The Apex Court has reiterated the principles laid down in Lalitha Kumari Vs. Government of tlttar 1 \ Pradesh and Ors3 and held that registration of FIR is mandatory \ I under Section 154 Cr.P.C., if the information discloses commission of a cognizable offence and no preliminary enquiry before FIR is permissible in such a situation; however, if the information received does not disclose a cognizabte offence, but indicates necessity of an inquiry being conducted, a preliminary inquiry may be conducted only to ascertain the facts disclosing cognizable offence, if any. '2025 Live Law SC 887 '(zotq 2 scc r I 4 titD.J Crlp.No.ll7.l7 2025

8. ln light of the said decisions, the contention of the petitioners' counsel is not tenable.

9. ln the present case, the complaint discloses the offences under Sections 417 and 420 ot lPC, out of which the offence under Section 420 of IPC is cognizable, therefore, the FIR was registered. Hence, the petition lacks merits. '10. ln the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed SD/- S. MALLIKURJUNA RAO EISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// \ CTION OFFICER To,

3. 4.

5. The lV Additional Judiciat Magistrate First Class at Mahabubnagar, Mahabub nagar District The Station House Officer , Mahabubnagar Rural Police Station, Mahabubnaoar , Maha bubnaga r District One CC to SRt BALA YAd MURALI Two CCs to Public P rosecutor High Hyderabad tourl Two CD Copres vocate [OPUCI Court for the State of Telangana at I VM/sa \ HIGH COURT DATED: 1511012025 ORDER CRLP.No.12747 ot 2025 ( * ;: +'r - q ..r t.(i , q' L"i 2 { il0ll 2u5 * I:,ATC DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION u