Shahazim Hameed Alias Shazeem Hameed vs The State Of T. S.
2025 Latest Caselaw 5360 Tel

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 5360 Tel
Judgement Date : 9 September, 2025

Telangana High Court

Shahazim Hameed Alias Shazeem Hameed vs The State Of T. S. on 9 September, 2025

      THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
              CRIMINAL PETITION No.10891 of 2025
ORDER:

1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking to quash the

proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.2 in C.C.No.822 of

2024, on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Chevella,

Ranga Reddy District.

2. Heard Sri Mohammed Abdul Rasheed, learned counsel for the

petitioner/accused No.2 as well as Sri Jitender Rao Veeramalla, the

learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent

Nos.1 & 2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is the

owner of the land in Sy.No.54/E and that he filed a suit for injunction

on 18.04.2024 and obtained an injunction order against the defacto

complainant. While the defacto complainant has filed a Writ Petition

but could not obtain any orders. Thus, out of grudge, to settle the

scores in the civil matter, he filed the present complaint on

15.05.2024 alleging false offences against the petitioner herein. He

further submitted that according to the complaint, the alleged offence

occurred one month prior to lodging of complaint i.e., on 15.05.2024.

ETD,J Crl.P.no.10891_2025

Thus, it is an afterthought of the defacto complainant to settle the

matter. Hence, prayed to quash the proceedings against the

petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that

the pendency of the civil suit is no point for consideration in the

criminal proceedings. He further submitted that when there is a

complaint and if allegations are disclosed with regard to criminality,

then the criminal proceedings are maintainable and it is for the police

to investigate and it is for the criminal court to ascertain the truth in

the complaint, but it cannot be quashed away just because the civil

proceedings are pending before the Court.

5. Perused the record. The petitioner has filed copies of the suit

pending before the Trial Court and also the copy of the Sale Deed

and other documents. His contention is that when a civil matter is

pending and when there is an injunction in his favour, criminal

proceedings cannot be invoked against him. He relied upon a

decision reported in the case of Doddapaneni Umamaheswar Rao

and others Vs.Navuru Gopal Reddy and another 1 wherein, Para 9 of

the said Judgment reads as under:-

2012 SCC Online AP 1313

ETD,J Crl.P.no.10891_2025

"The matter which essentially involves dispute of civil nature should not be allowed to become subject matter of criminal proceedings which may be resorted to as a short cut to execution of a non-existent decree". Complaint filed making allegations of cheating against the appellants whereas the case in fact involved civil dispute relating to a contract. In such event the High Court ought to have exercised its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C."

6. By observing so, the learned Judge of this High Court has

quashed the proceedings against the petitioner in the said case.

7. In Kathyayini v. Sidharth P.S. Reddy 2, the Hon'ble Apex Court

has held that pendency of civil proceedings on the same subject

matter, involving the same parties, is no justification to quash the

criminal proceedings if a prima facie case exists against the accused

persons. In the present case, the allegations do point out the

offences under Section 447, 427 read with 34 IPC

against the petitioner and the matter is pending vide C.C.No.822 of

2024, on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Chevella,

Ranga Reddy District. Hence, in the facts and circumstances, it is

deemed appropriate to dispose of the petition dispensing with the