The High Court · 2025

Judgment

2. 3 The Union of lndia, Rep by its lndran Railway Ministry, New Delhi. The South Central Railways Secunderabad, Rep by its Chief General Manager, Railway Nilayam, Secunderabad

Sri. T. Nagarjuna Reddy, Sub - lnspector of Ratlway Police Force, Rep by its Central Government, Standing Council Hrgh court at Hyderabad. ...Respondents/Com plainant 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 Petitioner's/Accused No 3,22,27 CC No.610 of 2024 in Crime.No.283 ol 2022 on the file of ll Metropolitan Magiskate for Railways at Secunderabad. l.A. NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that rr the circumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, th: High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including the a >pearance of the petitione r/Accused No.3, 22, 27 herein in CC No. 610 of 2024 n Cnme. No.283 of 2022 in Railway Police Force, Secunderabad, on the filo of ll Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways at Secunderabad, offences registered t l/Sec. 147 145 [b], 1 45 [c], 146, 17 4 lal of Railway Act, 1 989. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing il : Memorandum of Grounds of Crrminal Petition and upon hearing I3 arguments of Sri Nomula Chandan Rao, Advocate for the Petitioners and S;r N. Bhujanga Rao, Deputy Solicitor General of lndia on behalf of the respondents The Court made the following: ORDER THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.15602 OF 2025 ORDER: 1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.3, 22 & 27 in C.C.No.610 of 2024, on the file of the learned ll Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways at Secunderabad, registered for the offences under Sections 147, 145(b), 145(c), 1a6 and 174(a)of Railways Act, 1989.

2. Heard Sri N.Chandan Rao, Iearned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.3, 22 & 27 and Sri N. Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of lndia appearing for the respondents.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 17.06.2022 at about

08.45 hours, the unemployed youth and army job aspirants, organized 'Rail Roko Agitation' at Secunderabad Railway Station with a demand to cancel the "Agnipath Scheme" launched by the Central Government for short service recruitment in the lndian Army; that about1000 to 1500 youth by carrying flags, banners and rods entered into Secunderabad Railway Station by track and by over- throwing the gate-duty bandobusth staff, obstructing railway 2 aro) Ctl.P.NO.15@2 25 employees in discharging their duties; that the ,outh shouted slogans against the Central Government Policies, ransacked and damaged huge quantity of railway property inclu,j ng passenger amenities, CCTV cameras, burnt the coaches, perl ed stones on railway machinery/equipment, including Engines and police personnel/RPF on duty and broke all the coach wir lows of trains stabled on platforms; that the agitators did not obey 1e instructions of the police and RPF and continued with pelting stol )s; and that as a precautionary measure in saving the lives of the I rssengers and safe guarding the railway property, all the trains ,,r ere cancelled. Basing on the said facts, the present crime is registr: ed against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Secticr s 147, 145(b), 145(c), 1aO and 174(a) of Railways Act.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners subrr tted that the respondent-police have conducted investigation i I a haphazard manner and without verifying as to who took part in :l e alleged ,Rail Roko Agitation', arrayed the petitioners herein as r ccused in the present case. He further submitted that there rl e no specific allegations against the petitioners herein and that the .were only the members of the whats-app group of army job aspire.rts. He furlher submitted that the petitioners had not committed i ny offence as I alleged in the compraint. Mere presence of the petitioners at the Efo) c P.NO 75€02_25 Secunderabad Railway station on the date of alreged incident does not attract the alleged offences against the petitioners. He further submitted that the petitioners are farsely impricated in the present case basing on the confessional statements of the co_accused, which is abuse of process of law and is causing hardship to the petitioner and spoiling his bright emproyment prospects. He further submitted that the subject matter is squarely covered by the order dated 01.05.2025 passed by this Court in Crl.p.No.2674 of 2O2S and therefore prayed to quash the proceedings in the present C.C. against the petitioners herein.

5. Learned Deputy Solicitor General of India submits that the matter requires trial and onry upon concrusion of fulr-fledged triar, the truth would be elicited. He, therefore, prayed to dismiss this criminar Petition. \ \

6. Perused the record. The petitioners are suspected as agitators in the 'Rail Roko Agitation' basing on the confessional statements made to the police officer. Section 25 of the lndian Evidence Act prohibits the use of confessions made to a police officer against the accused in a criminal trial. Similar matter has been disposed of by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.p.No.2674 of 2025, dated 4 \ \ \ 'F5Fr ETO) Gl.P.NO 15@2 25 -

0.05.2025, wherein the proceedings against the perl tioner therein were quashed by relying on the decision of the Hcr'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lall and th: order dated

04.06.2024 passed by this Court in Crl.P.No.921 of 20'4 opining that the allegations made in the F.l.R. or complaint are I o absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prude nt person can ever reach to a just conclusion that there is sufficir nt ground for proceeding against the petitioner therein. Applyi rg the same analogy, this Court is also of the opinion that the prcr aedings in the present C.C. deserve to be quashed.

7. Hence, the proceedings in C.C.No.61O of 202', on the file of learned ll Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways at Ser:r nderabad, are hereby quashed against the petitioners herein.

8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed.

9. Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall sti nd closed. gr.o09[ r) r,,oaornr c-rr zAr 4J 33t rar r) //TRUE COPY// s .I I.OSMAN ALI BAIG I TANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, '1 The ll Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways, Secr\dgtat; J 2 One CC to Sri Nomula Chandan Rao. Advocate [OFUC] 3. One CC to Sri N Bhujanga Rao, Deputy Solicitor Generu I :f lndia, Advocate 4 Two CD Copies loPUCl \ ABK/PSL HIGH COURT DATED: 271'|,112025 ORDER CRLP.No.15602 of 2025 c) Go u- d ). \,A '*\\ ^t! !.,. i ii;.\, LA As N" s* + + :1._: ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION v $