✦ Telangana High Court

Mohammad Afroz Khan v. The State of Telangana

Case at a glance

Outcome

Disposed of

Hence, the Criminal Petition is disposed of diso

Key paragraphs

  • Para 66. Hence, the Criminal Petition is disposed of diso :nsing with the presence of the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 before the Trial Court provided that the petitioners are represented throu,; r an Advocate on every date of hearing and that they shall be prr:: ent…

Judgment

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in CC No. 1897 ot 2O22 on the file of the Honourable ll Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Nizamabad in so far as Petitioners !.A. NO: 2OF 2025 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 grant stay of all further proceedings against the petitioner in CC No. 1897 ot 2022 Honourable ll Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Nizamabad pending disposal of the main Criminal Petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing th, Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the argumen s of Sri ALLURI DIVAKAR REDDY ,Advocate for the Petitioners and Sri. Jit.r :nder Rao Veeramalla the Additional Public Prosecutor (TG) on behall rf the Respondent No. 1. and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2. The Court made the following: ORDER // THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVIEADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.1 5271 ot 2025 ORDER:- 1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 in C.C.No.1897 of 2022, on the file of the learned V Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nizamabad, registered for the offences punishable under Section 420 read with 34 of IPC and Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955.

#2. Heard Sri Alluri Divakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 as well as Sri Jitender Rao Veeramalla, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for \ the respondent No.1- State.

#3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, leamed counsel for the petitioners has limited his argument seeking a direction to dispense with the appearance of the petitioners before the Trial Court.

#4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that appropriate orders may be passed. 2

#5. Perused the record. C.C.No.'1897 of 2022 ts rending on the file of the learned V Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nizamabad. Considering the submissions made by t oth parties and in view of the facts and circumstances of the cast , it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the Criminal Petition by disp :nsing with the appearance of the petitioners before the Trial Court.

#6. Hence, the Criminal Petition is disposed of diso :nsing with the presence of the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 before the Trial Court provided that the petitioners are represented throu,; r an Advocate on every date of hearing and that they shall be prr:: ent before the Trial Court whenever their presence is specifically r -.quired during the course of trial.

#7. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall s i nd closed SD/- T iRINIVASA REDDY ASSIS TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// \ ;Ecnoru oFFrcER To, District. '1 . The ll Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Niz;r nabad, Nizamabad 2. The SHO Dharapally Police Station, Nizamabad Distrir;t 3. One CC to SRl. ALLURI DIVAKAR REDDY Advocate [() ]UCl 4. Two Copies to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court for ll : State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

#5. Two CD Copies Pk/Sa HIGH COURT DATED:2011112025 \ ...: i ';' ) j,1r CRLP.No.15271 of 2025 ) I 1 ll2 * CRIMINAL PEITITION lS DISPOSED OF DISF,:NSING WITH THE PRESENCE OF PETITIONER/ACCUSEE) NO. 1 TO 3. IN THE TRIAL COURT. q l ) \ {

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Hence, the Criminal Petition is disposed of diso

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 420; Essential Commodities Act, 1955 — s. 7.

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Telangana High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Criminal Appeal No. 15271 of 2025). ← Search more judgments