The High Court · 2025

1. The State of Telanoans, Rep. by its pubtic prosecutor, High Court for the State of TelanganjHyderabad.

2. Shaik Nurulla, S/o Saida , {Oe;10 yrs, Occ_ Co ection Executive at lClCl, -" R/rc. Ftat No-40.1, Surya Sak;th Caitt;, ttiia,npet,Gacnrprirv Medchat Matkajgiri Di3t. I..neSporuoerurS ^rrin,]i[ Petition under Section 52g of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal putltion, the High C;;;;;y ;; pleas-ed to quash the proceedings rerating to cc No. 7ag6 of 2o2i.penoing o;the file of Hon'ble Xl Addl. Metropolitan MagiJtrate, Kukatpaliy l.A. NO: 2 OF 2 024 Petition under Section 482 0f cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal peiition, the Hign Court may be p!."3.r"9 Io :l.ay al! further proceedings in CC No. 7396 of 2022 pe"nding on th; fit; of Honble Xl Addl Metropolitan Migishate, Kukatpalty pending dispisat of the present quash petition. This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition and upon hearing the arguments of Ms. B. KEERTHT 'Advocate for the petitioners and sRI suREpALLr pRASHANTH, Asst. REDDY Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 . The Court made the following ORDER: i i I THE HON'BLE SHRI WSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI CRTMINAL PETITION No. 15 25,4 0F 2024 ORDER: This ,Criminal Petition is filed undei' Section 528 of the Bharatila Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short tsNSS) by petitioners/accused Nos. 1 and 2 to quash the proceedings against them in C.C.No'7396 of 2022 on the file of XI 1\dditional Metropoiitan Magistrate, Ku1.:atpa1ly' Cyberabad. The offence alleged against petitioners is under Section 324 read with Section 34 of Indiar Penal Code' 1860 (for short IPC').

2. Hear,l Ms. B.Keerthi Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Surepa-lli Prashanth, learned Assistant Public Proseoutor for the respondent - State Pen.Lsed the material on record.

3. On the basis of a complaint of respondent No'2, FIR bearing No.5i95 of 2O2l was registered on 16 12''')O2l for the offence urnder Section 324 read with Section 34 of IPC' 2 JAK, J oRLP 15254 2024

4. It is stated in the complaint that on t6.I2.2O21, respondent No.2 with his Manager of ICICI Bank, Shapurnagar Branch, went and met accused No.1 for collection of EMI. Accused No.l paid .sorne amount and said that he would pay rest of the amount after some time. That they waited for three hours, but, accused No.l did not come. It is further stated in the complaint that accused No.1 asked them to come to IDPL X roads and wait for him. That he came along with one of his friend accused No.2 and met at Gudenmet X roads. That both accused Nos. 1 and 2 misbehaved with respondent No.2 and his manager, abused them ald hit respondent No.2 with .Kadiyam, the forehead causing arl injury. That he was taken to BBR hospital for treatment and three stitches were done to him. Hence, the complaint. Charge sheet is filed on 26.72.2021 filed before the XI Additional Metropolitan . Magistrate, Kukatpally, Cyberabad under Section 324 r/w 34 of IpC. Notice under Section 41A(1) Cr.p.C. was issued to accused Nos. 1 and 2 on 17.12.2O2I. a ) JAK, J 1].LP 5254 2024 l,earned counsel for petitioners submitted 'hat on 5. reading of th e complaint and statements recorded by the Police and charge sheet, it is apparent that it is a false case.ItisfurtherSubmittedthattherearediscrepanciesin the staterlents of witnesses, complaint and the charge sheet. It is aiso submitted that the aliegations leve1led are only with al-r intention to implicate the petitionr:rs and there is no tluth in the said allegations' That in view of the discrepancir:s, proceedings in C'C'No'7396 of 2021"' on the file of Xl Aclditional Metropolitan Magistrate, Kukatpally' Cyberabad, be quashed.

6. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor contended that an injury is car'rsed to responder t No.2 and that certificate was issued by BBR super sper:ia.lty hospital indicating the nature of injury' It is also subm itl.ed that charge sheet is filed, interferer: ce is not necessitated and proceedings be continued'

7. Hearcl learned counsels, 'perused the rec ord and considered t.he rival submissions. k 1 4 JAK, J cRl,P 15254 2024

8. A Telugu written complaint was filed on 16.12.2021 by respondent No.2 at 19.00 hours, registered as FIR Nq.595 of 2O2l under Section 324 read.with Section 34 of IPC. In the complaint, it is stated that reSpondent No.2 along with his manager contacted accused No.1 (Ega Venkatesh) for repa5rment of personal loan (EMI) and that they met accused No.l, who gave some amount. It is also observed in the complaint that respondent No.2 along with his malager waited for three hours and he did not come. They went to IDPL X roads on the instructions of accused No. 1 and when they were waiting, accused No.l came with his friend. A11 the four went to Gudenmet X roads near Indian Oil Petrol Bunk where the accused are said to have misbehaved with them, abused them in filthy language and snatched the phone, bike keys and thrown bike keys. That accused No.1 hit the complainant with Kadiyam, due to which complainant received injuries and taken treatment at BBR hospital and that three stitches are made. 9 A certificate is issued by Medical Officer of BBR super specialty hospital, annexed at Page No.33. In the , 5 JAK, J CRLP 15254 2024 certiflcate, ,Cate of incident is shown as 76'12'2021 rrnd the time enterecl is 05.45 P.M. It is also written that assault was by unknown persons at 04'15 P'M' at IDPL X roads and there is a lacerated wound of lcm x 3 % crr:'s over forehead region, simple in nature' There is no re'cording that stitches have been made by doctor'

10. It is defies the logic of this Court as to how a certificate came to be issued stating that respondt:nt No'2 visited the hospital at 05:45 P'M' When observed lrom the complaint, F IR and the charge sheet, complaina'r.rt along with his manager went to meet accused No'1 at04 27 P'M' and waited for three hours and it was only aft':r three hours, they met accused along with his friend i e'' accused No.2 at Gr-rdenmet X roads near Indian Oil Petrol Bunk' If the number of waiting hours and the time state C in the complaint is, taken, the incident could have occurred only at around 08:00 P.M. and not before that' But, surprisingly complaint is lodged at O7:00 P.M. and in the medical certificate, it is shown that respondent No'2 atterlded the hospital rat 05:45 P.M. In the compiaint, nam': of the 6 JAK, J 0RLP 15254 2024 c accused No.l is reflected, whereas in the certificate issued by Medical Officer, BBR super specialty hospital, it is reflected as assault by unknown persons. In the light of these discrepancies, it is apparent thaf complaint is frivolous in nature and is malalide. It is specihcally stated in the complaint that respondent No.2 sustained injuries. There are no overt acts attributed to accused No.2 i.e., P.Madhusudhan Reddy. In the absence of aly overt acts being attributed to accused No.2 and also the discrepancies which are glaring as pointed out, this Court is of the opinion that the very complaint is frivolous in nature and it would be an abuse of process of law, if the proceedings are permitted to continue in C.C.No.7396 of 2022 pending on the file of XI Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Kukatpally.

11. Section 324 of IPC reads as follows: "Voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapo[s or means - Whoever, except in the case provided for by Section 334, voluntarily causes hurt by means of any instrument for shooting, stabbing or cutting, or any instrurnent which, used as weapon of offence, is likely to cause death, or by means of frre or aly heated substalce, or by means of aly poison or any corrosive substance, or by means of any explosive 7 JAK, J cRLt, 11254 2024 substixl(re or by means of any substance which-it is deleterious to the human body to inhale, to swallow' or to receive into the b1ood, or by means of any animzLl, shall kre punished with imprisonment of either rlescription ior a term which may extend to three yr:a,rs, or with hne, or with both'"

12. The irrgredients of Section have to be'made ou- in the complaint t)t1ma facie. In the facts and circumsta-:Ices of case, considering the contents of complaint, FIR, charge sheet and the statements, this Court is inclined to hold that ingrerlients of Section are not made out, as the discrepar-rcies noted are glaring and go to the rool- of the lSSl]C

13. It is brought to the notice to this Court by learned counsel for petitioner that C.C.No.7396 of 2022, which was pending or I the hle of XI Additional Metr:rpolitan Magistrate Kukatpally, Cyberabad, was transferrr:d to II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-XIII Additional'ludicial Magistrate ,tf First Class, Medchal-Malkjagiri District, at Kukatpally.

14. For the aJtiresaid reasons, continuance of the proceeding;s in C.C.No.7396 of 2022 on the fite of II I { 8 JAK, J CRLP 15254 2024 G Additional Junior Civil Judge_cum_XIII Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal_Ma_lkjagri District, at Kukatpally, would be abuse of process of law and are liable to be quashed and accordingly quashed.

15. With the above observations, this Criminal petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. l I i I I //TRUE COPY// SD/-A.V.S. RASAD ASSISTANT RE ISTRAR SECTION OFFICER Matkajgiri District.

1. The Xl Additional Metropolitan ,Vlagistrate, Kukatpalty, Cyberabad, Medchal 2 TheStation House Officer , Balanagar police Station, Medchal Malkajgiri 3. Two CCs to Asst. public prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana 4. One CC to Ms. B. KEERTHI REDDy Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies at Hyderabad (OUT) To, k-UYDL \ t j 1 :3 1HE t,Il. /.' J 1'J 11 APl 20?5 * D5 sP,1t C:\r! t o( 7 o A {rt HIGH COURT DATED:2710312025 ORDER CRLP.No.15254 of 2024 ALLOWING THE ( ]]1L.PETITION. )r Lr