The High Court · 2025

1. The State of Telangana, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad

2. Gurrala Ral Kumar, S/o lsrael, Aged about 45 years, Occ: Asst. Engineer, TSNPDCL, R/o Thettelapadu Village, Thirumalayapalem Mandal, Khammam District ...RESPONDENT ...DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/RESPONDENT 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 lo quash the PRC No.1 0 of 2025 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate at Sathupally, Khammam District l.A. NO: 1OF 2025 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Arlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including appearance of this petitioner/Accused rn PRC No 10 of 2025 on the file of on the file of Judicial First Class lvlagistrate at Sathupally, Khammam District, p€nding disposal of the Criminal Petrtron This Petrtron comrng on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Crimrnal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri p V VENKATA RAVI SANKAR, Advocate for the petitiofler and SRt. JTTHENDER RAO VEERAMALLA, Additional Public p rosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and None Appeared for the Respondent No.2 The Court made the following: ORDER I i I I t I I IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TEI ANGANA AT HYDERABAO THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEi /I EADA CRIM INAL PETITION No.14872 of 201ti Date:29.12.2025 Between: Durgam Mahendra @ Nani @ Rohit And State of Telangana, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad and another- ORDER: Peri ioner/Accused . Respondents This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-at:r used seeking to quash the proceedings in PRC No 10 of 2025 on the 'ile of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sathupally. Khammam Distr ;t, registered for the offence under Section 306 lPC.

2. Heard Sri P.V. Venkata Ravi Sankar' learnr-' I counsel for the petitioner and sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learr.'d Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1-State

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has subrr tted that the petitioner is a soldier in the lndian Army and that he r:ver abetted the alleged suicide of the victim and that he never 1 romised the \ \ 2 EfD,J Cd-P. No.l472 ot mZs victim that he would marry her and that the present case is foisted against him with all false allegations. He further submitted that being a soldier, the petitioner is a disciprined individuar and that he is facing a lot of humiliation in attending the proceedings and therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

4. Learned Additionar pubric prosecutor has submitted that the prosecution courd coilect the cail data records between the petitioner and the victim and that there are specific aflegations against the petitioner that he had a physicar rerationship with the viciim on a promise of marriage. He, therefore, prayed to dismiss the petition.

5. Perused the record

6. lt is borne out from the record that {he allegred victim was a Panchayat Secretary at Raghunadhagudem village of lGlluru Mandal, Khammam District and was unmarried. The petitioner_ accused is a soldier in the lndian Army and native of Balaraopet village of Laxettipeta Mandar of Mancherial District, and trc is already married. Since two years prior to the occurrence of the alleged incident, the accused got introduced to the deceased through social media, developed friendship and on promise of marriage, she fell in love with him and that the petitioner used to visit the rented room of the deceased frequenily and stayed with her for few days at her I I 3 ETD,J Crt.P. No.t1A72 of 2025 room. Around one month prior to the incident, the. avoiding the deceased by making false allegationr and abused her in filthy language and neglecteri expressed her feelings over life, he asked her to di, the charge sheet further reveal that the prosecution call data'records and also the WhatsApp chats of l the victim. LWs.4, g and g are arrayed as circumst The veracity of these witnesses and the strength r evidence, need to be tested during the course of trre merits to quash the proceedings against the petitio" deemed appropriate to dispose of the petition by dis;1 presence of the petitioner before the trial court. retitioner started :n her character her. When she ,. The recitals of ras collected the e petitioner and rntial witnesses. f the electronic . There are no rr. Hence, it is ensing with the

7. Accordingly, the Criminal petition is dispose J of dispensing with the presence of the petitioner before the trial cotrr : provided he is represented by a counsel before the trial court or every date of hearing and he shafl be present before the rriar court a; and when his presence is required during the course of trial. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall ste rd clos ed SD/- RINIVASA REDDY S IS I-ANT REGISTRAR $ //TRUE COPY// ;ECTION OFFICER To,

1. The Judicial First Class Magistrate at Sathupally, Khamrri .n District 2. The Station House Officer, Kallor Police Station. Kallor, Kl ammam District G-,U4 . 1 I I

3. One CC to SRI P V VENKATA RAV| SANKAR Advocate tOpUCl 4. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] \

5. Jwo CD Copies VA//PSL -J'W HIGH COURT DATED: 2911212025 ORDER CRLP.No.14872 ot 2025 ltl{lt ) () * 3 fl J!! 2026 e. * 1 : t I DISPOSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION , t, \-/./ -

1.a lt/\ ) -l I t tq/t/26