Telangana High Court
Pulipati Prasad vs The State Of Telangana on 11 July, 2025
Author: Juvvadi Sridevi
Bench: Juvvadi Sridevi
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI
CRIMINAL PETITION No.8076 of 2023
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the
petitioner-accused No.1 seeking to quash the proceedings against him in
C.C.No.113 of 2015 on the file of the learned I Additional Junior Civil
Judge-cum-Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Khammam,
arising out of Crime No.188 of 2013 of Khammam II Town Police Station,
Khammam District, registered for the offences under Sections 420, 468
and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC').
2. Heard Mr. Dammalapati Srinivas, learned Senior Counsel
representing M/s. Pillix Law Firm for the petitioner, Mr. T.V.Satya Kumar,
learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-de facto complainant
and Mrs. S.Madhavi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for
the respondent-State. Perused the record.
3. The allegation against the petitioner-accused No.1 is that he along
with other accused in the crime has forged and fabricated the resolutions
passed in a General Body meeting of the Cooperative Society i.e., M/s.
Sri Sai Dhurga Balaji Health and Educational Welfare Society and also
misappropriated Rs.25,00,000/- of the Cooperative Society by forging the
signatures, cheating the de facto complainant and other Directors.
4. Basing on the complaint lodged by the de facto complainant, a
case in Crime No.188 of 2013 was registered against the petitioner and
others. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed,
cognizance was taken and the case was numbered as C.C.No.113 of
2015 for the aforesaid offences.
5. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that
accused Nos.2 to 12 in the crime have approached this Court by filing
quash petitions, however, the same were dismissed. Aggrieved by the
same, accused Nos.2 to 12 in the crime have filed Criminal Appeal
Nos.3892-3893/2019 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, wherein, the
proceedings against them are quashed. Since the petitioner herein is
also similarly situated, he prayed to quash the proceedings against him.
6. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor as well
as learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent in one voice
contended that the quashment of proceedings against accused Nos.2 to
12 in the crime is not a ground for quashing the proceedings against the
petitioner herein, since there are specific allegations against him. All the
allegations levelled in the complaint as well as in the charge sheet are
subject matter of trial, and hence, this is not a fit case to quash the
proceedings at this stage. Accordingly, they prayed to dismiss the
petition.
7. As seen from the record, it is evident that accused Nos.2 to 12 in
the crime have filed Crl.P.Nos.9612 and 9994 of 2015 before this Court
under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the proceedings. This
Court has partly allowed the said petitions on 28.03.2019 quashing the
cognizance order only for the offence under Section 420 of IPC. Accused
Nos.2 to 12 challenged the said common order before the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal Nos.3892-3893/2019. The Hon'ble
Supreme Court vide judgment dated 18.03.2025 allowed the said
Criminal Appeals, by holding that civil proceeding was initiated on the
same set of allegations on which an adjudication has been made on each
and every aspect after adducing evidence and the appellants therein
have not been found to be liable/guilty on any count, and the present FIR
which was lodged after three months was not proper and in fact mala fide
has accordingly quashed the criminal proceedings against accused
Nos.2 to 12 in the present FIR, reversing the common order, dated
28.03.2019 passed by this Court in Crl.P.Nos.9612 and 9994 of 2015.
8. Since there is no dispute that the allegations against all the
accused are identical and as the petitioner-accused No.1 is also similarly
situated as that of accused Nos.2 to 12 as rightly contended by the
learned Senior Counsel, this Court is of the considered opinion that
continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner herein
amounts to sheer abuse of process of the law.
9. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed, quashing the
proceedings against the petitioner-accused No.1 in C.C.No.113 of 2015
on the file of the learned I Additional Junior Civil Judge-cum-Special
Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Khammam.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________
JUVVADI SRIDEVI, J
Date: 11.07.2025
rev
