Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Perused the record 6. The contents of the comptaint and the recitals of the charge sheet point out the allegations against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 115(2) and 352 r/w. 3(5) of BNS. lt is further borne out by the record that…
Judgment
High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad.
Kongara Jangaiah, S/o. Late Pentaiah Aged 45 years, Occ: Agriculture, Rl/o. H.No 3-19/1, Rangapur Village, Nandigama Mandal, RangaReddy District. 509228. 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 proceedings in CC No.57712025 on the file of Principal Judicial First Class Magistrate at Shadnagar, Cyberabad. against petitioners/Accused No. 1 . ...RESPONDENT l.A NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circurnstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings in CC No. 57712025 on.the file of Principal Judicial First Class Magistrate at Shadnagar, Cyberabad against petitioners/Accused No. 1 . This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri RAVI CHANDRA BEJJARAM, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri E. Ganesh, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for Respondent no.2. The Court made the following: ORDER \ \\ THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA ORDER: This criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.c.No.Slr of 20zs on the file of principal Judicial First class Magistrate at shadnagar, cyberabad, against the petitioner-accused No.1, for the offences under sections 11s(21 and 352 r/w. 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya sanhita, 2o2g (for short 'BNS').
2. Heard Mr.Ravi chandra Bejjaram, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.E.Ganesh, learned Assistant public prosecutor appearing for respondent No. 1 -State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner herein has lodged a compraint against respondent No.2-de facto. complainant and as a counterblast, the present comptaint has been todged against him by the de facto complainant as a revenge. He further submitted that there are no specific altegations tevelled against the petitioner to attract the \ \ ingredients of the offences alleged. Hence, he prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. ) \ \ / 2 i
,Leanred Assistant Public Prosecutor has submitted that -while a panchayat was being conducted, the petitioner herein has abused the de facto complainant in filthy language and beaten him with hands. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the petition.
Operative part
Perused the record 6. The contents of the comptaint and the recitals of the charge sheet point out the allegations against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 115(2) and 352 r/w. 3(5) of BNS. lt is further borne out by the record that LWs.2 and 3 are the eye witnesses to the incident. The veracity of these witnesses needs to be tested during the course of trial. However, the presence of the petitioner before the triat court is dispensed with provided that he is represented by a counsel before the trial court on every date of ,hearing and shall appear before the trial court whenever his presence is required during the course of trial. 7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed Sd/. AHMED ABDULLA KHAN ASSISTANT REGISTRAR 6 SECTION OFFICER ,/TRUE COPYII To,
The Judicial First Class Magistrate at Shadnagar, Cyberabad. 2. The Station House Officer, Nand(;ama Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate.
3. One CC to SRI RAVI CHANDRA BEJJARAM Advocate IOPUCI 4. The Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, High Court AA1, E ?...^ ran a^-:^- Buildings at Hyderabad. (OUT) HIGH COURT DATED i1311112025 i i I r/ ORDER CRLP.N o.14816 of 2025 ,{ HE STE t 3 oBJANltz6 * :? 7- t,) I i I ,, I CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISPOSED OF.
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482; Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.