The High Court · 2025

Telangana, Through the Public Prosecutor, High Court, ...Respondent No.1

2. Sri. Avusula Raghavendra Chary, S/o Late A Balraj, Age: 36 years, Caste. AC-528 of B.N.S.S , Occ Business (Goldsmith), R/o - H No 6 206/7, RTC Colony, Near Good life School, Jillela Guda, lt/eerpet, 500097 ...Respondent No.2 Petition under Section 528 of the BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the A/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petitron, the High Court may be pleased to Quash the charge-sheet and all further proceedings in C.C. No. 1452 of 2023 on the file of the X Addl. Chief tt4etropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad arising out of Crime No. 43 of 2023 of P.S. Gopalapuram, against the Petitioner /Accused Nos. 3, 5 and 11 for the alleged offence under sections 467, 468, 471 and 420 lndian Penal Code 1860 l.A. NO: 1OF 2025 Petition under Section 528 of the BNSS praying that in th(, rrrcumstances stated in the lrlemorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High ( ourt may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in c c No 1452 of 2023 on t e file of the X Addl. Chief Metropolitan lvlagistrate, Secunderabad. against the t,, titioner/Accused No 3,5,11 including the personal appearance of the petitionr:r/ \ccused No. 3,5,.1 1, pending disposal of the criminal petrtion This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the [\/e r orandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of S. l\ilanda Deekshitha, Advocate for the Petitroners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramal l, learned Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 state anc rf None appeared for the Respondent No.2 The Court made the following: ORDER / IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAI) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENTVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.1725O of 2o25 Date:, 19.12.2o25 Be tween: Kongari Raju and others AND The State of Telangana, Represented bY Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad and another. ...Petitioners ...Respondents ORDER This Criminal Petition is liled seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.l452 of 2023, on the file of the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.3, 5 and 11, for the offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 47 I and 42O of Indian Penal Code.

2. Heard Ms. Manda Deekshitha, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, 2 - learned Additional Public Prosecutor fo: respondent No.1-State

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners s'r:mitted that the petitioners have not committed any olli r ce and have been falsely implicated in the present case. Even according to the a-llegations made either in t re complaint or in the hnal report, there are no allegatiorrr - much less specific allegations against them so as tr attracl the offences under Sections 467, 468, 47 I anc 42O of IPC. Hence, continuation of proceedings against the petitioner is a clear abuse of process of lau' arr the entire proceedings is liable to be quashed.

4. Per contra, the Iearned Additional Publ c Prosecutor submits that there are specific allega . :ns le".elled against the petitioners and the Investigatinrl ()flicer, a-fter recording the statements of the witnesses. :ras hled the final report wherein the role of each accused is specifically mentioned. There are specifi, allegations levelled against the petitioners to attract S ections 467, .-;&:..;*- ::3:: 46A, 47 I and. 42O of IpC. Basing on the grounds urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is contended that the pefitioners are not entitled for quashment and all the grounds has to be adjudicated and decided by the Tria_l Court after a full_fledged tria.l. He further submitted that, insofar as petitioner No. l/accused No.3 is concerned, the learned Magistrate has issued NBw and is pending.

5. Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties arrd upon perusal of the materia_l available on record, it reveals that there are specilic allegations leveled against the petitioner. Basing on the final report and the statements which were recorded under Section 161 of the Criminal procedure Code, 1973 (for short, ,Cr.p.C.), wherein the role of each of the petitioners is specifically mentioned, this Court does not find any ground to quash the proceedings. 6. However, taking into consideration of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the presence of the - I iI 'l 4 lI52 of petitioners/accused r tolitan thtough L rject to Nos'3' 5 and 11 in C'C'No' 2023, onthe frle of the X Additional Chief Metr Magistrate, Secunderabad' is dispensed with' sr the condition that they shall be represented their counsel on each and every date of heartnll presence of the petitioners is reqrrired' they shal appear before the trial Court' ln case of their non-apl earance on the specific date fi'xed by the trial Court br their appearance, the trial Court is entitled to pro' :ed with the matter, in accordance with law' 7. Accordingly' the Criminal Petition is dismLr sed' It the Miscellaneousapplications,pendingifrny,shall stand closed' /ITRUE COPY// SDI- N.SRIHARI DEt UTY REGISTRAH !-;- I ECTION OFFICER To, '1.

2. 3. 4 5 rhe x Addftional chieJ Metropolitan Masistrate I ::::ti ;'o'j.i:, Distrrc-t^ -, ii.: a;;;; H.,.: gi,::';:i:i5l'ijil PC"J:T Ll'"??'"unnu"' u' Two CCs to the Publtc rro Bli"tt i3 L?'^ll"o' Deeksh ith a' Advocate to P u cl ''"""ilJ =l' Two CD GoPies u. GNKIPSL HIGH COURT DATED: 1911212025 ORDER CRLP.No.17250 of 2025 ,.j jAiF O,J '\ I IiB 2l?i z (;) I. J<. -.t( ).ge,:C),1:C-ti ---..-.--,.-. DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION G 11 2, 61 ,^.