The High Court · 2025

10.G. Manemma, W/o. Late Sriramulu, Aged 43 years, Occ. Housewife.

11. G. Srinivas, S/o. Late Sriramulu, Aged 28 years, Occ. Private Job.

12. G. Sarika, D/o- Late Sriramulu, Aged 23 years, Occ. Student. [Respondents No. 10 to 12 are Rl o. H.No.7-1-70, Bairamalguda Village, Saroornagar Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.l '13.8. Saritha, W/o. B. Praveen, Aged 26 years, Occ. Hous,: vife, R/o. H.No.4-64, Taramaathipet Village, Abdullapurmet Mandal, RR Distrit t. ...Resp rndents/Defendants lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the r rcumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cotrr : may be pleased to Stay all further proceedings of O.S.No.704l2013 on the fik> of the lV Addt. Dist. Judge, R-R.Dist., and orders may be passed accordingly in I e interest of justice. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. PASHAM KRISHNA REt DY, Advocate Counsel forthe Respondents: NONE APPEARED The Court made the following: ORDER ,/ IN THE HIGH COURT FOII TIIE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKA YARA CNIL REVISION PETITION No.3952 of 2024 THE 16th DAY OF DECEMBER,2025 Between: Kante Manamma. AND Majjiga Jitendar and 12 others ORDER: . . . Petitioner . . . Respondents Heard Sri Pasham Krishna Reddy, learned counsel lor the petitioner. None for the respondents. Peursed ttrc entire rccord.

2. This Civil Revision Petition is flled by the petitioner aggrieved by the order dated 13.11.2024 passed by the leamed tV Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar ('triat Court') in I.A.No- 1009 of 2024 in O.S.No.704 of 2013, whcrein a pctition filed under Order XVI Rule I of CPC to summon the Assistant L)ircctor, Telangatra State Forensic Science Laboratories, Red Hitts, Hyderabad, ivho issued fbrensic report in Fite No.DOCl2l\l2\2l , dated 29.11.2021 ('FSL report'), has been dismissed. t \ RY.J ('RP 3952 2024

3. The petitioner herein filed suit in O.S.No.704 of lll3 on the file of the trial Court seeking relief of declaration of ROR lroceedings dated

17.06.2006 in File No.ROR,ts/l868/2006 as null and vt id, to register the name of the petitioner herein by deleting the name of resJ ondent Nos.1 to 6 herein in respect ol the suit schedule property in ROI{ rccords, to issue decree ol dernolition of shed, recovery of possession, pr,: irninary decree of partition and lor mense profits. The said suit was at thc s age of argurnents and at that stage, the petitioner herein learned about t r : FSL repoft and other-original documents pending in Crime No.809 ol'l )12 on the flle of the I Junior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District. The pe itioner intends to demonstrate beforc the trial Court that the documents u,[r :h rvere produced lor entering the names of the respondents in ROR r:corcl are krrged documents. To prove the same, the FSL report is a nece:;r arl, docurnent

4. Whilc so, the respondents opposed the l.A. undt r revision alleging that FSL report whiclr is filed in criminal proceedings is rubjcct to trial and report olcrirninal prcceedings does not bind the parties ir a cir,'iI suit

5. The lenlned trial Court after considering the case r I Lroth thc parlies held tl.rat thc FSI. r'eport has not attained finality and it is : r-rbjcct to tliaI and the petit.ioner has liled I.A. under revision only to d-; q on the rnatter. Aggrieved b1,thc said order, the present revision is prcl'cr ed. 2 I ,, /i

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner subrnitted that it is essential that RY,J cRP 3952 2024 the FSL report be marked in evidence on behalf of the petitioner to prove that on the basis of forged documents the Tahsildar has malaficlely deleted the name of the petitioner from ROR records and entered the names of the respondents. It is further submitted that there is no occasion for the petitioner to file the FSL report at the time of recording ol the petitioner's evidence as the said report was subrnitted to the crirninat Court on

29.11.2021. Immediately after learning about the FSL report, the petitioner has sought for certified copies and produced the same befbre the trial Court and said documents have been received. The documcnt rvhich is prepared by the lorensic expert is to be marked through the person, who authored the same and as such there is need to sumnlon thc Assistant Director, Tclangana State Forensic Science Laboratory, Red Hilts. l{yderabad and to mark the said document. Hence, prayed to allorv the present revision. l. The FSL report once issued is a documcnt that can be considered and its validity one way or other is not affected by the tinding of the criminal ) Coutt. The criminal Court may peluse the ESI- report lor the purpose of ascerlaining commission of a crime and whereas the samc report may be I perused by the civil Court for the purpose ol ascertalning genuineness of docurnent produced before lt. Except for examining the expert, who 3 RY.J cRP 3952 2024 authored the report, no further certification or validation s required for the FSL report to be consideted. Therefore, this Court is rf the considered opinion that the vier.v expressed by the trial Court that 1[ e FSL reporr has not attained finality is erroneous and the same is not tena [: e. In view of thc foregoing discussion, thc petitioner is entitled for the reli : 'prayed for

8. In the result, thc Civil Revision Petition is allou'er setting asidc the order dated 13. I I .2014 passed by the trial Court in I.A.l'l r.1009 ol 202'l in O.S.No.704 of 2013 and consequently, I.A.No.l009 of I )24 is allowed to issue summons to thc Assistant Director, Telangana State F-orensic Science Laboratories, Recl tlills. llyderabad, for examining in r rspect of the filc No. DOCi 2 I 0/201 I . datcd 29 .l I .2021 . The triat Court r;. ,all proceed florn this stage. -lherc shall be no order as to costs. Miscellan rous applications. ilany, pending strall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/. N.:HANDRA SEKHAR I):PUTY REGISTRAR SECTI OFFICER To, I I

1. The file of the tV Addl. Dist. Judge, R-R. District. 2. One CC to Mr. PASHAM KRISHNA REDDY, Advocale I )pUCl 3. Two CD Copies RC/PSL HIGH COURT DATED: 1611212025 srAI & C L) 2l JIN ?[t$ ,7- 6)x t OgSP^TC :rr ORDER CRP.No.3952 of 2024 Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is Al owed. e)