M.Sarvotham Reddy vs The State Of A.P. Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 4061 Tel

      HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.SANTHOSH REDDY

               CRIMINAL PETITION No.5759 of 2013
ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is directed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to

quash the proceedings in Crime No.125 of 2013 of Banjara Hills

Police Station, Hyderabad District registered for the offences 452 and

323 IPC against some unknown persons. But during the course of

investigation in the remand report, dated 14.04.2013, the petitioner

was shown as A-10 and the alleged offences under Sections 440, 452,

440, 307, 419 IPC read with Section 120(B) read with 34 IPC and

Section 25(1)(b) of Indian Arms Act, 1928. Aggrieved by the same,

the petition is filed.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the

second respondent and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for State.

Perused the records.

3. The second respondent lodged a complaint before the Station

House Officer, Banjara Hills Police Station on 10.02.2013 alleging

that on the intervening night of 9/10.02.2013 around 2.30 hours on

hearing loud sound from his son's bed room on the second floor, he

rushed to his son's room and came to know that some unknown

persons attacked him. Due to which, he sustained injuries on his hand

and mouth. It is stated that some land disputes at Sanikpuri against

Mr.Narahari Rao and Noma function hall owner by name

Mr.Yadagiri Reddy, as he won the case against them. In the said

matter, they threatened him through Naxalites when the case was

pending. Basing on the said allegations a case in crime No.125 of

2013 under Sections 452 and 323 IPC was registered and investigated

into. During the course of investigation, on 13.04.2013, the

confessional statements of A-2 and A-3 were recorded and basing on

the said confessional statements, it was revealed that A-7 to A-10

including the petitioner hatched a plan to eliminate the second

respondent and the accused gave full authority to A-1 to consult any

hired goondas to execute the task. As such, in the remand report, the

name of petitioner was added as accused for the aforesaid offences.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that there are no

specific allegations against the petitioner/A-10 and unknown persons

were involved in the offence. He further submits that the case was

split-up against other accused and the trial was held and the same was

ended in acquittal by the learned Special Sessions Judge in S.C.No.2

of 2020 vide judgment dated 08.12.2021. Therefore, he submits that

continuation of proceedings would be abuse of process of law and

prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the second respondent and learned

Assistant Public Prosecutor submits to dispose the petition on merits.

6. The case against A-1 to A-4 and A-6 to A-9 was committed to

the Court of Sessions in P.R.C.No.7 of 2014 and the same was

registered as S.C.No.2 of 2020 before the Court of the Special

Sessions Judge for Trial of Criminal Cases relating to Elected MPs

and M.L.As of the State of Telangana and the case was disposed of on

08.12.2021 acquitting all the accused for the alleged offences.

7. Coming to the instant case, admittedly, there are no allegations

against the petitioner. In the F.I.R. dated 10.02.2013, the second

respondent specifically alleged that some unknown offenders attacked

his son and caused injuries during the intervening night of

9/10.02.2013 at about 2.30 am. He suspected the role of A-7 and

A-8, as there are civil disputes pending between them.

8. It appears the name of petitioner was added as A-10 in the

remand case diary basing on the confessional statements of

A-1 to A-3 recorded by the Investigating Officer. But there are no

specific allegations and role played by him. Even according to the

statements of the witnesses recorded and the confessional

panchanama of the accused except alleging that he is one of the

conspirators along with A-7 to A-9.

9. After considering the submissions of learned counsel for the

petitioner and upon perusing the material on record and also the

judgment of the Special Sessions Judge in S.C.No.2 of 2020, I am of

the view without there being any allegations either in the F.I.R. or in

the remand report, prima facie, constituting any of the alleged

offences against the petitioner, continuation of proceedings against

him would certainly amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore,

I am of the view that it is a fit case to invoke the powers under

Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings.

10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed. The proceedings

against the petitioner/A-10 in Crime No.125 of 2013 of Banjara Hills

Police Station, Hyderabad are hereby quashed. Miscellaneous

petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.

______________________ A.SANTHOSH REDDY, J 04.08.2022 Nvl

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.SANTHOSH REDDY

CRIMINAL PETITION No.5759 of 2013

04.08.2022 Nvl