The High Court · 2025

rep.by its Public Prosecutoi, High Court of SDPO, Kothagudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem

2. Smt. Gudipudi Adi Lakshmi, W/o. Sathya Devakanaka Raju, Aged years, Occ. Household, R/o. Lakshmidevipally Village and Mandal, Kothagudem District. about 46 Bhadradri ... RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANTS 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 call for the records pertaining the proceedings in SC No. 97 of 2O24 on the file of the Court of the Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCs/STs (POA) Act-cum-Addl.Sessions Judge at Khammam and quash the same, in the interest of Justice, and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 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 be pleased to grant stay of all proceedings in SC No. 97 of 2024 on the file of the Court of the Special Judge for Trial of Cases under SCsISTs (POA) Act-cum- Addl.Sessions Judge at Khammam pending disposal of the quash petition, in the interest of Justice, and to pass This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri. M.S. Balasubramanium representing Sri T VASANTHA RAO, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri. Jithender Rao Veeramalla the Additional Public Prosecutor (TG) 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 AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.l7664 of 2025 Between Kalasani Ravi Kumar, S/o.Venkateswarlu, FUo.Bhadradri Kothagudem District & another. AND The State of Telangana rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad & another. Petitioners ...Respondents 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 & 2 in S.C.No.97 of 2024, on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial of cases under SCs/STs (POA) Act -cum- Additional Sessions Judge at Khammam, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447 234(b),323,506 read with 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1[s), 3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 2015.

2. Heard Sri M.S.Balasubramanium, learned counsel regresenting Sri T.Vasantha Rao, learned counsel on record for ttre \ 2 1,: E1O) Cdp-r7g_21P5 petitioners/accused Nos.1 & 2 as well as Sri Jitender Rao Veeramalla, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1- State.

3. Le,arned petitioners'counsel has submitted that the petitioners have nolhing to do with the allegations leveled in the complaint and that they,sold away the subject land long ago and that they are not concemed with the dispute existing on the said land. -He submitted that that the petitioners are facing false allegations and that they never abused nor beat the defacto complainant at any time and that giving a criminal colour to the civil dispute is not just and proper to settle the scores on civit side. He further submitted that the allegatiorrs alleged against the petitioners under the Scheduled castes/Sicheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act do not get aftracted even according to the contents of the complaint and hence prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the pros,=cution could record the statement of eye witness which clearly discloses the offences against the petitioners herein. He therefore prayed to dismiss the petition. 5- Perused the record. The contents of the complaint, the recitals of charge sheet and also the statements of witnesses point r!qlln!G,,r '.! 3 €IDJ oE_rru_mzt out specific allegations against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 447 234(b), 323, 506 read with 34 of IPC and Sections 3(1[s), 3(2[va) of SC/ST (POA) Act, 2015. The statement of LW4, who is listed as eye witness, point out specific incidents of abusing and beating the defacto complainant. Therefore, the veracity of this witness needs to be tested during the course of trial. The truth or otherwise in the allegations can be culled out only after a full-fledged trial. Considering the submissions made by both parties and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the Criminal Petition by dispensing with the appearance of the petitioners before the Trial Court.

6. Hence, the Criminal Petition is disposed of dispensing with the presence of the petitioners/accused Nos.1 & 2 before the Trial Court provided that the petitioners are represented through an Advocate on every date of hearing and that they shall be present before the Trial Court whenever their presence is specifically required during the course of trial. ." Z,*.,*MiO€lango_uq pgliligns pending, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPYII To, Sd/. M. NAGAMANI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR G SECTION OFFICER // /

1. The special Judge for Triat of cases under scs/srs (poA) Act_cum- Addl.sessions JIdge at xnammam, Khamm€rm District. 2. One CC to SRt. T VASANTHA RAO Advocate tOpUCl 3' Turo CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High court for the State of retangana at Hyderabad [OUTI. 4y- 4. Two CD HIGH COI'RT DATED: 29l,12l,2025 CRLP.No.17664 ot 2025 I ( E'rl1 s Lq II0 B 2 ,l {} .:?, .rlz . '._l_laa., \i: pArc$6) --i=-' \. ( .or,! .is i/t# CRIMINAL IPEITITION IS DISPOSED OF. oI rv'