Puja Agarwal vs The State Of Telangana Rep.By Its ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 6457 Tel

Telangana High Court

Puja Agarwal vs The State Of Telangana Rep.By Its ... on 12 November, 2025

Author: N. Tukaramji

Bench: N. Tukaramji

           THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI


                  WRIT PETITION No.5346 OF 2016


ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed with the following relief:

"To issue an appropriate Writ, Order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari calling the records relating to FIR No.31/2016 dated 23.01.2016 on the file of Station House Officer, Mancherial and quash the same to the extent of the petitioner/A-7 as arbitrary and illegal and also misuse of powers by the respondents conferred upon them and also violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India .........."

2. None appeared on behalf of the petitioner.

3.1. Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits

that after due investigation, a charge sheet was filed in Crime No.

31 of 2016 and the case has been numbered as C.C. No. 436 of

2020 on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First

Class, Mancherial. He further submits that the proceedings are

presently at the stage of trial.

3.2. Additionally submits that once a charge sheet has been

filed, the prayer for quashing the FIR cannot be entertained. He

therefore prays for dismissal of the writ petition.

4. I have perused the material on record.

5. The petitioner contends that FIR No. 31 of 2016 was

registered arbitrarily and without any legal basis. However, the

developments during the pendency of this writ petition

demonstrate that the crime was duly investigated and, upon

finding prima facie material, the Investigating Agency filed a

charge sheet. The trial Court, upon examination of the material,

has taken cognizance of the offence and has proceeded further

by framing charges.

6. In this factual backdrop, it is evident that both the

Investigating Officer and the competent Court have found

sufficient grounds to proceed with the matter, and therefore the

petitioner's contention that the FIR lacks any basis is unfounded.

7. It is also well settled that a writ petition under Article 226 of

the Constitution of India seeking quashment of an FIR ordinarily

does not lie once the Magistrate has taken cognizance of the

offence. Thereafter, if any cause of action still survives, the

appropriate remedy is to invoke the jurisdiction of the High Court

under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 542 of the BNSS, as held in

State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, and

consistently followed in later judgments.

8. In view of the above legal position and the developments in

the present case, the prayer for quashing the FIR cannot be

considered in this writ petition. However, the rights of the

petitioner to pursue appropriate remedies available in law, if so

advised, are expressly reserved.

9. With this direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No

order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand

closed.

__________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J

Date: 12.11.2025

MRKR