The High Court · 2025

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated rn the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings of C.C No 8323 of 2022 pending on the file of lll Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate At. Nampally, Hyderabad pending disposal of the Criminal petition This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri MOHD ISLAMUDDIN ANSARI ,Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr V.Jithender Rao Addl Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No1. and none appears for the Respondent N02. The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT'JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EA'] A NAL PETITI ONN o.1345 f 2025 2o CRIMI is filed under Section 528 of L haratiya (BNSS), 2023 seeking to c t ash the 8323 of ORDER:- 1. This Criminal Petition Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita proceedings against the petitioner/accused No'3 in C'C Nr 2022 on the file of the learned lll Additional Chief [t4'-' ropolitan tr/lagistrate, Nampally Hyderabad' registered for the offerc:s under Sections 42O tlw' 511 of IPC and Sections BO(a) and 1 / / of lt'/lotor Vehicles Act' 19BB (for short MV Act') Z. Heard tvlr'Mohd. lslamuddin Ansari' learned coun I )l for the No 3 as well as Sri Jithender Rao Veer: nalla' the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearlng for the r sPondent petitioner/accused No.'1-State

3. The brief facts of the case are that responden No'2-Sub lnspector of Police' lodged a complaint against the accr s ed stating that when he along with his staff are conducting vehicre c.recking at Maitrivanam Junction' Hyderabad' they stopped 4 vehicles, driven by the petitioner along with other accur;"d' without numbelr plate. Thereatter' a case was registered vide Cri ne No 794 "'o-wheeler 2 €rL ctl.P.No.1l452 2O2s of 2022 for the offences punishable under Section 420 rlw. 511 of IPC and Sections 80 (a) and 177 of the lVlV Act. -

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and the allegations leveled against him by respondent No.2, do not constitute any alleged offence. He further submitted that the ingredients of Section 420 rlw. 51 1 of IPC are not made out, since there are no allegations of cheating and dishonest inducement of victim to deliver any property to any person or make, alter or destroy any part of valuable property. lnsofar as Section B0(a) of the MV Act is concerned, the said Section speaks about the procedure in applying for and granting permissions to the vehicles. The said section does not provide any punishment. Further, it is nowhere mentioned in the Act that driving vehicle without number plate is an offence. Therefore, he prayed the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the allegations against the petitioner, requires trial Hence, he prayed the Court to dismiss the petition.

6. Perused the record. // 3 EfD,] I iD No 1)152 2A25

7. Having regard to the submissions made by both I te learned counsel and on a perusal of the material available cr record, it appears that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he drove the vehicle without number plate, which does nol : rrne under the purview of Section 420 rlw. 5.1 1 of lpC. Further, the petitioner was also charged for the offence punishable under Sectio I B0 (a) of the MV Act, which speaks about the procedure in apply r g for and granting permission to the vehicles. Merely driving tt-: vehicle without number plate does not attract the offence under s ection B0 (a) of the MV Act. Further, Section 171 of the l\IV Ac. does not attract in this case. Section 39 of the t\,4V Act states nr: :essity of registration and specifies that every vehicle shoulc caffy a registration mark clisplayed in the prescribed manner. lowever, contravention of Sectron 39 of the MV Act is punisha b e under Section 192 of the MV Act So, the present provision does . )t attract the said offence. Further, the averments in the charge she, rt do not constitute the offence as alleged against the petitioner. -.,erefore, the continuation of criminal proceedings against the 5 etitioner amounts to abuse of process of law_ Hence, the proceeding s against the petitioner are liable to be quashed 4 LID, Crl P No-11452 2025 B. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.3 in C.C.No.B323 of - 2022 on the file of the learned lll Additional Chief Metropolitan [\,4agistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, are hereby quashed

9. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed SD/-G JYOTHI TANT REGISTRAR SS //TRUE COPY// CTION OFFICER To, l The lll Addl Hyderabad Chief lVletropolitan Magistrate At Nampally

2. The Station House Officer, police station S.R. Nagar, Hyderabad 3. One CC to SRt MOHD TSLAIMUDDTN ANSART Advocate tOpUCl 4. Two CC to SRt PUBLIC PROSECUfOR High Court for the State of Telangana. Hyderabad[OUT]

5. Two CD Copies ,h; 'ry AG/ABK I HIGH COURT DATED:1611012025 /l t, 0ti l::r. ,t) \\- i.:,s-- ..-ra i:U l'tf,l (i a .-,,J :n- ORDER CRLP.No.13452 of 2025 CRLP IS ALLOWED Q\ !_) fl'\-t g4 ,\