Monday, 13, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Dhanee Singh Dhanush Singh, vs State Of Telangana,
2024 Latest Caselaw 2021 Tel

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 2021 Tel
Judgement Date : 3 June, 2024

Telangana High Court

Dhanee Singh Dhanush Singh, vs State Of Telangana, on 3 June, 2024

         THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA

           CRIMINAL PETITION No.10779 of 2023

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') by the

petitioner, who is arrayed as sole accused to quash the

proceedings against him in C.C.No.1833 of 2023 on the file of

learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-IX Additional

Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Medchal-Malkajgiri

District, registered for the offence punishable under Section

79 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)

Act, 2015 (for short 'the Act').

2. The brief facts of the case are that the de-facto

Complainant alleged that on 17.01.2023 at about 14.30

hours, as part of Operation Smile, the team of pet

Basheerabad and division team and child line team with

DCPU team when they were on duty, they received information

that a person by name Dhanush Singh is running Karni

Interiors at Gundlapochampally and there is one minor by

name Sathyam whose age is 17 years and the said minor is

made to work for less salary and is made to work for more

hours. Based on the complaint, the Police Pet Basheerabad

registered a case vide Crime No.72 of 2023.

3. Heard Sri Baglekar Akash Kumar, learned counsel for

the petitioner and Sri S. Ganesh, learned Assistant Public

Prosecutor for respondent No.1- State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

petitioner was falsely implicated in the case alleging that

besides engaging the victim minor more than prescribed

working hours, the petitioner paid the less salary to the victim

minor. In this regard, he placed reliance on the judgment of

the High Court of Kerala in A. Nizamuddin Vs. SHO,

Kannur1; Kothakonda Aishwarya Vs. State of Telangana2

and the judgment of the Apex Court in R.P.Kapur Vs. State

of Punjab3 and prayed the Court to allow the Criminal

Petition by quashing the proceedings against the petitioner.

5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public

Prosecutor submitted that at this stage it cannot be decided

(2017) SCC online Ker 7324:2017 Cri LJ 4085

(2023) (2) ALD (Crl.) 321 (TS)

(1960) 3 SCR 388

that whether the victim is working more hours than the

prescribed working hours and the petitioner is paying less

salary, as such, it requires trial. Therefore, he prayed to

dismiss the petition.

6. In view of the rival submissions made by both the

learned counsel, this Court has perused the material available

on record and found that alleged offence is under Section

79 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,

2015. The allegation against the petitioner is that inspite of

using service of victim minor child who was aged about

17 years more than the prescribed working hours, he is paying

less salary to the victim. It is pertinent to note that the

averments in the complaint do not reveal that the petitioner

how many hours victim worked and what is the salary paid by

the petitioner. Moreover, the essential ingredient to attract

the offence under Section 79 of the Act is that the minor child

must be kept in bondage for purpose of employment or the

child's earnings should be withheld or such earnings shall be

used by employer for his own purpose, where as the said

allegations are not there in the complaint or in the charge

sheet. Hence, considering the facts and circumstances of the

case, this Court is of the considered opinion that since neither

the victim minor kept in bondage for purpose of employment

nor the petitioner engaged the victim minor without paying

any amount, the offence under Section 79 of the Act does not

attract and the proceedings against the petitioner are liable to

be quashed.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the

proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.1833 of 2023 on

the file of learned II Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-IX

Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Medchal-

Malkajgiri District, are hereby quashed.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also

stand closed.

______________ K. SUJANA, J

Date: 03.06.2024 dsu

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Media

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter