The High Court · 2025

Public Prosecutor, High Courtfor the State of Telangana, High Court Buildings,Hyderabad

2. Hemi Banoth,, w/o. shivaram, Aged about 65 years, Occ House help_hired worker, R and R Colony Yettigaddakistapur, GajwelMandal, Siddipet District RES PON DENTS/COM PLAINANTS 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 FlR.No:47912025 dated 1911112025 before PS, Gajwel, Siddipet District. l.A. NO:2 OF 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 a be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in F|R.No.47912025 dated 1911112025 before PS, Gajwel, Siddipet District, including arrest of the Petitioners/Acc:used No.1 to 5, pending disposal of the above Criminal petition. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri CH RAVI KUIUAR, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 and none appeared for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA ERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRT JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.16102 of 2025 Date: 05.12.2025 Between: Kuprala @ Surukonti Madhusudhan Reddy and four others . . ...petrtloners AND State of Telangana, through SHO, P.S. Gajwel, Siddipet District, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, High Court Buildings, I{yderabad and another ...respondents ORDER This Criminal Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.479 of 2025, on the file of Gajwel Police Station, Siddipet District, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.l to 5, for the offences punishable under Sections 329 (4),79,352,324 (a) r/w. 3 (5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNS') and Sections 3 (l) G) (s) of The Scheduled Castes and The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short'POA Act'). 2

2. Heard Mr.cH.Ravi Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithendar Rao veeramalla, leanred Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners subrnits that the petitioners have not committed any offence and have been falsely implicated in this crime. Even according to the allegations made in the complaint, the ingredients of the offences under sections 329(4), 79, 352, 324(4) read with 3(5) of BNS and Sections 3( 1)(r) (s) of the PoA Act are not attracted. He further submits that respondent No.2 has no semblance of right over. the subject property. Tlie Govemment had allotted the house temporarily to respondent No.2, but even after the expiry of the allotted period, they did not vacate the premises. The subject property was subsequently allotted in favour of the petitioner No.2 by the competent authority through a Deed of conveyance dated

16.10.2023. Respondent No.2 is, therefore, in unauthorized and illegal possession. Respondent No.2 approached this court by filing w.P. No.34955 of 2025 but failed to secure any orders in her favour. Thereafter, she lodged the present complaint against the petitioners, .lthough the essential ingredients of the alleged r' offences ardo not made out. Hence, the continuation of the --.y' ! { I i I i I i i i l 3 proceedings against the petitioners amounts to a clear abuse of the process of law.

4. Per contra, the learned Additional public prosecutor submits that offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. The Investigating officer has also issued notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS ro the petitioners on 27.11.2025, and the petitioners are entitled to put forth their grievance by way of a reply. The Investigating officer will conduct the investigation in accordance with the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumor vs. stute of Bihart .

5. Having cbnsidered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the offences levelled against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, basing on the instructions submiued by the Assistant commissioner of police, Gajwel Division, on

04.12.2025, submits that the Investigating officer issued notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS to the petitioners including accused No.6 on27.11.2025. '1zot+;8 scc 273 4 In view of the same, the petitioners/accused Nos.l to 5 are

6. granted liberty to submit their reply by enclosing all relevant documents before the Investigating officer. The Investigating officer is directed to follow the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumur's case (supra)

1. With the above direction, the criminal petition is disposed of' As 1 sequel, miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, stand closed. Sd/. N. SRIHARI DEPUW REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, '1. The Principal Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gajwel 2. The S.H.O., P.S. Gajwel, Siddipet District. 3. One CC to SRl. CH RAVI KUMAR Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court for the State of Telangana, HYD (OUTI

5. Two CD Copies w HIGH COURT DATED:05/1 212025 a n ORDER CRLP.No.16102 ot 2025 ,5 1 0 0E{l ?t?i Z Ct * DISPOSING OF THE CRLP uD