Mohd Sabeer vs The State Of Telangana
2025 Latest Caselaw 4722 Tel

Telangana High Court

Mohd Sabeer vs The State Of Telangana on 10 April, 2025

     THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI

             CRIMINAL PETITION No.15106 OF 2024

O R D E R:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short 'BNSS') by

petitioners/accused Nos.6, 10, 14 and 20 to quash the

proceedings against them in CC.No.784 of 2018 on the file of

Junior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate

at Armoor.

2. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and

Mr. Surepalli Prashanth, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for

respondent- State. Perused the material on record.

3. A complaint dated 06.09.2017, is filed by V.Anil PC-102 of

Nandipet Police Station. The gist of the complaint is that one Mr.

Barki Mukesh uploaded a post on Facebook in which he morphed

and placed a photo of Lord Hanuman idol on a mosque along with

the letters of Jai Shri Ram. There was unrest between members of

both Hindu and Muslim communities and they started pelting

stones at each other. To disperse the mob, the police personnel

reached the spot at about 8:30 p.m. A crowd of 100 mob were

armed with stones. When asked to disperse immediately as it is

JAK, J CRLP_15106_2024

an unlawful assembly, the mob pelted stones on the police by

paying deaf ear to the request. As a result police officers

sustained bleeding injuries. A few names of the persons are

recorded in the complaint.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners

submitted that the allegations levelled against them are

unfounded as proper identification cannot be made in a mob of

100 that petitioners/accused involved in pelting stones. It is

further submitted that 3 FIR's came to be lodged one after the

other in different Police Stations within a span of half and hour.

Petitioners were shown as accused in all the above 3 cases and

one of the case was registered as S.C.No.52 of 2020 on the file of

Assistant Sessions Jude, Armoor. The trial Court by order, dated

31.10.2023, in SC.No.52 of 2020 acquitted all the accused

persons including petitioners herein on the ground of lack of

identification of specific persons who pelted stones. It is further

submitted that Crl.P.Nos.11165 and 11166 of 2023 are filed

before this Court by some other accused persons to quash the

proceedings against them in CC.No.784 of 2018 and CC.No.175 of

2021. This Court by common order, dated 28.11.2023, quashed

the proceedings against accused in CC.No.784 of 2018 and in

JAK, J CRLP_15106_2024

CC.No.175 of 2021. Petitioners/accused herein are arrayed as

accused in CC.No.784 of 2018. Hence, the proceedings against

them in CC.No.784 of 2018 be quashed.

5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of

State has submitted that there are specific allegations with regard

to a mob trying to disturb the peace and harmony of the society.

That identification of certain persons involved in mob was done by

the local police constable and it is only on such identification, the

accused/petitioners were named in the charge sheet and that it is

a fit case for trial and no interference is necessitated as peace and

harmony in the society is utmost of importance and the same

cannot be disturbed under any circumstances. It is further

submitted that there were eyewitnesses to the entire incident and

the trial may be continued against the accused/petitioners.

6. Heard learned counsels, perused the record and considered

the rival submissions.

7. On 06.09.2017, a complaint is filed by the by V.Anil PC-102

of Nandipet Police Station. In the complaint it is stated that being

enraged with a Facebook post, a mob of 2 communities (Hindu

and Muslim) had assembled and started pelting stones on each

JAK, J CRLP_15106_2024

other. It is stated in the complaint that mob of 100 people pelted

stones at each other, in which police officers sustained bleeding

injuries. A few names of the persons who pelted stones were

identified. Charge sheet is filed bearing CC.No.784 of 2018.

8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners invited

attention of this Court to the order, dated 31.10.2023, passed in

SC.No.52 of 2020. Petitioners/accused herein are arrayed as

accused in the above said SC. The trial Court by an order, dated

31.10.2023, found the accused therein including

petitioners/accused herein not guilty for the offence punishable

under Sections 147, 148, 307, 333 read with Section 149 of IPC.

In the charge sheet which is filed herein, sections 332 and 324

are reflected.

9. Be that as it may, Crl.P.Nos.11165 and 11166 of 2023 are

filed before this Court by other accused for quashing of the

proceedings against them in CC.No.784 of 2018 and in CC.No.175

of 2021. Learned Single Judge of this Court, by a common order,

dated 28.11.2023, held as follows:

"13. The learned counsel for the petitioners also relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Iqbal @ Bala & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors (2023 (5) Supreme 497) wherein it was held that:

JAK, J CRLP_15106_2024

"10. At this stage, we would like to observe something important. Whenever an accused comes before the Court invoking either the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) or extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution to get the FIR or the criminal proceedings quashed essentially on the ground that such proceedings are manifestly frivolous or vexatious or instituted with the ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance, then in such circumstances the Court owes a duty to look into the FIR with care and a little more closely. We say so because once the complainant decides to proceed against the accused with an ulterior motive for wreaking personal vengeance, etc., then he would ensure that the FIR/complaint is very well drafted with all the necessary pleadings. The complainant would ensure that the averments made in the FIR/complaint are such that they disclose the necessary ingredients to constitute the alleged offence. Therefore, it will not be just enough for the Court to look into the averments made in the FIR/complaint alone for the purpose of ascertaining whether the necessary ingredients to constitute the alleged offence are disclosed or not. In frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case over and above the averments and, if need be, with due care and circumspection try to read in between the lines. The Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC or Article 226 of the Constitution need not restrict itself only to the stage of a case but is empowered to take into account the overall circumstances leading to the initiation/ registration of the case as well as the materials collected in the course of investigation. Take for instance the case on hand. Multiple FIRs have been registered over a period of time. It is in the background of

JAK, J CRLP_15106_2024

such circumstances the registration of multiple FIRs assumes importance, thereby attracting the issue of wreaking vengeance out of private or personal grudge as alleged."

14. Thus these were not cases of wreaking vengeance out of private or personal grudge, but considering all the other attending circumstances wherein three cases were registered one after the other within a time span of half an hour gap in between them at three different places wherein the names of the petitioners were cited as accused in all the above three cases and the most severe case among them tried as S.C.No.52 of 2020 resulted in acquittal of all the accused persons including the present petitioners herein due to lack of identification of specific persons who pelted stones on the police personnel from out of the mob of around 100 persons and the result of the present calendar cases is also likely to be on the same lines resulting in waste of the precious time of the Court and considering that the petitioners are moving around the Court for the past more than 5 years without trial being commenced by ruining their careers and employment opportunities, it is considered fit to quash the proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.784 of 2018 (arising out Crime No.121 of 2017 of P.S. Nandipet) and C.C.No.175 of 2021 (arising out Crime No.122 of 2017 of P.S. Nandipet) on the file of the Junior Civil Court - cum - Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Armoor."

10. Having perused the entire factual matrix of the case, this

Court deems it appropriate that the proceedings in CC.No.784 of

2018 on the file of Junior Civil Judge-cum-Additional Judicial

First Class Magistrate, Armoor, against petitioners/accused are

liable to be quashed and are hereby quashed. Needless to state,

JAK, J CRLP_15106_2024

this Court is not inclined to differ from the opinion of the order,

dated 28.11.2023, passed in Crl.P.Nos.11165 and 11166 of 2023

and trial Court's order dated 31.10.2023, passed in SC.No.52 of

2020. The trial Court had elaborate trial and held that all the

accused are not guilty for the offences. It is also observed that

Section 307 of IPC was filed in SC.No.52 of 2020 which is grave

offence. For reasons aforesaid, this Court is of the view that

continuance of proceedings against petitioners/accused Nos.6,

10, 14 and 20 in CC.No.784 of 2018 on the file of Junior Civil

Judge-cum-Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate at Armoor

would amount to abuse of process of law and are liable to be

quashed and are accordingly quashed.

11. Criminal Petition stands allowed.

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand

closed.

___________________________ ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J

Date: 10.04.2025 Kgk

JAK, J CRLP_15106_2024

THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI

CRIMINAL PETITION No.15106 OF 2024

Date: 10.04.2025

Kgk