Telangana High Court
Puspa Gudur Khan vs The State Of Telangana on 10 July, 2025
Author: N.Tukaramji
Bench: N.Tukaramji
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 8549 OF 2025
ORDER
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'the BNSS') with a prayer to set
aside the order dated 28.02.2025 in Criminal Revision Petition No. 196 of
2024 in Crl.M.P.No. 828 of 2024 in C.C.No. 18 of 2017 passed by the
learned Special Judge for Trial of Offences under SCs and STs (POA) Act-
cum-VI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad.
2. I have heard Mr. Md. Nazeeruddin Khan, learned counsel for the
petitioner/de facto complainant and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor, representing respondent No.1-State.
3. The relevant facts, briefly stated are that, during the pendency of the
proceedings in C.C. No. 18 of 2017, the de facto complainant filed a
petition in Crl.M.P. No. 828 of 2024 under Section 301(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the CrPC'), seeking permission to
engage an Advocate to assist the Public Prosecutor in contesting the
matter. The trial Court, by order dated 18.09.2024, dismissed the petition
on the ground that it was filed at the stage when the matter had already
been posted for judgment and, therefore, had become infructuous. On
revision, the learned Sessions Court affirmed the decision of the trial Court
by passing the impugned order. Hence, the present petition.
2 NTR,J
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner/de facto complainant submits
that, during the pendency of the revision, an application was filed for
reopening the trial and recalling PW-1, a crucial witness. The matter is
now posted for the examination of the recalled witness. In such
circumstances, permitting the petitioner to engage an Advocate to assist
the Public Prosecutor would aid the Court in ascertaining the truth and
arriving at a just and fair conclusion.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that the present
petition challenges the impugned order, which was appropriately passed
by the Courts below in the context of the circumstances prevailing at that
time. However, considering the subsequent developments in the case, the
Public Prosecutor prays that this Court may pass an appropriate order.
6. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel and
perused the materials on record.
7. Upon a careful perusal of the record, it is evident that the petition
filed under Section 301(2) of the CrPC, seeking permission to assist the
prosecution, was initially presented at the stage of final arguments. In that
context, the conclusion reached by the trial Court in dismissing the petition
as infructuous appears to be legally justified.
3 NTR,J
8. However, it is equally pertinent to note that the petitioner has made
an uncontroverted assertion that certain witnesses, including a key
prosecution witness, were subsequently recalled for further examination.
In light of this development, the petitioner's request to assist the Public
Prosecutor assumes relevance and significance. The assistance of the
de facto complainant's counsel, at this juncture, would not only aid the
prosecution but would also facilitate the Court in arriving at a just and
comprehensive adjudication of the matter. Under these circumstances,
there appears to be no legal impediment to allowing such assistance.
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. The petitioner/de facto
complainant is permitted to assist the Public Prosecutor through duly
engaged counsel in all further proceedings, including during the stage of
final arguments.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
_______________
N.TUKARAMJI, J
Date: 10.07.2025
svl
