Telangana High Court
Smt. Vanapatla Kavitha vs The State Of Telangana on 23 September, 2025
THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI
CRIMINAL PETITION No.15507 OF 2024
% Dated:23.09.2025
# Smt. Vanapatla Kavitha, W/o. Jagan
Mohan Rao, Aged about 43 years,
Occ: Household, R/o. Anupuraram,
V/o. Vemulawada Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District
.. Petitioner/Accused
And
The State of Telangana, through S.H.O.,
Vemulawada Town Police Station,
Rajanna Sircilla District, rep., by Public
Prosecutor, High Court for the State of
Telangana at Hyderabad and another
.. Respondents
! Counsel for petitioner : Mr. V.V. Ramana Rao
^ Counsel for respondent No.1 : 1. Learned Additional Advocate
General
2. Mr. A.P. Suresh Ram,
learned counsel.
<GIST:
> HEAD NOTE:
? Cases referred
1. MANU/SC/0003/2024
2. (2019) 16 SCC 739
3. (2021) 3 SCC 751 : 2021 INSC 135
4. 2024 SCC OnLine SC 58 : 2024 INSC 49
2 JAK, J
Crl.P.No.15507 of 2024
THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI
CRIMINAL PETITION No.15507 OF 2024
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short 'BNSS')
by petitioner/accused to quash the proceedings in Crime
(FIR) No.592 of 2024 on the file of Vemulawada Town Police
Station, Rajanna Sircilla District registered for offence
under Section 420 of IPC vide FIR dated 05.11.2024.
2. Heard Mr. V.V.Ramana Rao, learned counsel for
petitioner/accused, learned Additional Advocate General
for respondent No.1-State and Mr. A.P.Suresh Ram,
learned counsel appearing independently for the officer,
without there being a vakalat. Learned Senior Counsel
Avinash Desai is appointed as amicus.
3. This case has a chequered history. This Court is
conscious of the fact that a contempt case is pending
before this High Court for non-compliance of orders in
W.P.No.31271 of 2016 and a Writ Appeal preferred
challenging the orders in writ petition as on date.
3 JAK, J
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioner/
accused that house bearing No. 7-13 (H.No.4-37/1), at
Anupuram Village, was acquired by Government in 2004,
compensation was paid, but her name was not shown in
the list of project displaced families. That, she filed
W.P.No.31271 of 2016 in the High Court and the High
Court by order dated 02-11-2023 held that her family
comes under the definition of "Project Displaced Family".
It is further submitted that for non compliance of the
order(s) of High Court, she filed a contempt case bearing
No.1937 of 2024 (filed on 19.09.2024), pending on the file
of the High Court as on date. It is also submitted that a
Writ Appeal bearing No.688 of 2024 (filed on 06.06.2024),
was preferred against the order in W.P.No.31271 of 2016,
no interim orders were granted in the Writ Appeal, which is
pending on the file of this Court.
5. It is submitted that, suppressing all these facts,
respondent No.2 herein, who's not a party to the writ
petition and the contempt case, on the basis of letters of
the office of Collector & RDO, Rajanna Sircilla District,
4 JAK, J
lodged a complaint against the petitioner, on the ground
that petitioner misguided the High Court and obtained the
order(s). It is further submitted that the High Court,
declared the petitioner, "as eligible to receive the benefits
under the R&R Policy and petitioner's family was a separate
family as per G.O.Ms.No.68, I & CAD (PW.L.A. IV R & R)
Department, dated 08.04.2005, and directed respondents to
include name of petitioner in beneficiary list of Project
Displaced Families."
6. It is pointed out that the respondents i.e., Collector
and RDO in the writ petition, instead of complying with
the directions of the Court, initiated the criminal
proceedings by addressing letters to the office of Tahsildar.
That, the Tahsildar, Vemulawada, addressed letter
No.E/992/2024, dated 05.11.2024 (annexed at page No.8),
to the Station House Officer, Police Station Vemulawada,
to book a case against petitioner/accused. It is contended
that respondent No.2 has lodged the complaint on the
instigation of official respondents (Collector and RDO) in
5 JAK, J
W.P.No.31271 of 2016 to withdraw the contempt case and
hence, is an abuse of process of law.
7. It is submitted that the act of the Tahsildar in filing a
complaint and initiating criminal proceedings against the
petitioner are improper and the proceedings in Crime (FIR)
No.592 of 2024 be quashed.
8. Narration of Events:
A writ petition bearing No.31271 of 2016 was filed,
this Court allowed the writ petition vide order dated
22.11.2023. For non-compliance of orders in writ petition,
C.C.No.1937 of 2024 came to be filed (filed on 19.09.2024),
a writ appeal bearing No.688 of 2024 was preferred (filed
on 06.06.2024), no interim orders were passed in the writ
appeal. Pending writ appeal and contempt case, Criminal
Proceedings were initiated on the ground that the writ
petitioner (Petitioner/accused herein) obtained the order in
writ petition on the ground that she has mislead the Court,
(in fact this issue is to be considered by this High Court in
the writ appeal which is pending, if the said ground is
6 JAK, J
raised). The following events lead to the filing of the
criminal petition.
9. Petitioner/accused herein filed a writ petition bearing
No.31271 of 2016 with the following prayer:
"...to issue a writ, order or direction more
particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus
declaring the action of the respondents for non
inclusion of petitioner's name in Project Displaced
Families beneficiary List of Anupuram Village,
Vemulawada Mandal, Karimnagar District which is
coming under submergence of Mid Manair Reservoir
for providing R and R Policy benefits in terms of
G.O.Ms. No. 68, Irrigation and CAD (Project Wing-
LA IV R and R) Department, dated 08-04-2005 as
illegal, arbitrary and contrary to above
G.O.Ms.No.68, Irrigation and CAD Department,
dated 08.04.2005 and consequently direct the
respondents to extend all the benefits under R and
R policy in terms of G.O.Ms.No.68, Irrigation and
CAD (Project Wing - LA IV R and R) Department
dated 08.04.2005 to the petitioner..."
10. A learned Single Judge of this Court vide order, dated
22.11.2023, in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 held as follows:
"5. The learned Government Pleader for Land
Acquisition appearing for the respondents basing on
the counter submits that as per Para 5.4 (a) of State
R&R Policy, 2005 issued in G.O.Ms.No.68, 1 & CAD
(PW. LA. IV R & R) Department, dated 08.04.2005,
the members of the families who are permanently
residing, practicing any trade, occupation or
vocation in the Project Affected Area are eligible for
the benefit under R & R Policy. Therefore the
members of the families who are not permanently
residing in the Project Affected Areas are not eligible
for the other benefits for loss of livelihood etc., under
the R & R Policy except the value of their structures.
7 JAK, J
6. The learned Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents further submits that after conducting
detailed survey as per the guide lines of
G.O.Ms.No.68, I & CAD (PW. LA. IV R & R)
Department, dated 08.04.2005 the eligible PDF/PAF
list of Anupuram Village consisting (1091) families is
published vide Gazette No.67, dated 29.12.2009. But
the writ petitioner name not included in socio-
economic survey list published vide Gazette No.67,
dated 29.12.2009 as she was already married before
conducting of the socio-economic survey, and it is
known that the petitioner is living in Peddalingapoor
Village of Ellanthakunta Mandal with her husband
and children but her mother and father Smt.
Vanapatla Padma and Sri Jalapathi Reddy names
were included in socio-economic survey list at
Gazette Sl. No.733, H.No.7-12 and her mother also
given patta certificate and wages. As such the
petitioner is not entitle for any benefits under R & R
Policy, G.O.Ms.No.68 dated 08.04.2005 and
requested to dismiss the writ petition.
7. After hearing both sides and on perusing the
records, this Court is of the considered view that the
petitioner is the owner and possessor of the house
bearing No.4-37/1, (MMRP H.No.7-13) situated at
Anupuram Village, Vemulawada Mandal,
Karimnagar District. The Land Acquisition-
Authorities estimated the amount towards Land
Acquisition compensation to the house bearing No.4-
37/1, (MMRP H.No.7-13) and also paid the amount
to the petitioner. But not included the name of the
petitioner and included the names of the parents of
the petitioner, who are resided at house bearing
No.7-12 for providing benefits under R & R policy in
G.O.Ms.No.68, I & CAD (PW. LA. IV R & R)
Department, dated 08.04.2005. According to counter
submitted by the respondents, it is noticed that only
basing on the names of the petitioner's parents in
the Socio-Economic Survey list, the petitioner's
name was not included and contended that the
respondents came to know that the petitioner's
family was not resided at Anupuram Village, which
is under submergence of Mid Manair Reservoir is
contrary to the records of the Land Acquisition
proceedings. Admittedly, the respondent-authorities
issued estimated compensation to the petitioner's
house bearing No.4-37/1, (MMRP H.No.7-13) in
separate proceedings as she is the owner of the
8 JAK, J
house. In view of the same, the petitioner's family is
eligible to get the benefits under R & R policy in
G.O.Ms.No.68, I & CAD (PW. LA. IV R & R)
Department, dated 08.04.2005 as project displaced
family of Anupuram Village, Vemulawada Mandal,
Karimnagar District.
8. In view of the above findings, this writ petition/is
allowed by declaring that the petitioner is eligible to
receive the benefits under R & R policy as the
petitioner's family is a separate family under the
definition of the 'Project Displaced Family' as per
G.O.Ms.No.68, I & CAD (PW. LA. IV R & R)
Department, dated 08.04.2005. Therefore, the
respondents are directed to include the name of the
petitioner in the beneficiary list of Project Displaced
Families of Anupuram Village, Vemulawada Mandal
of erstwhile Karimnagar District and pay the benefits
under the said scheme as per the procedure laid
down in the scheme and further directed to comply
the above direction within eight (08) weeks from the
date of receipt of copy of this order. There shall be
no order as to costs."
11. A Writ Appeal bearing No.688 of 2024 was preferred
on 06.06.2024, no interim orders were granted.
12. A contempt case was filed for non-compliance of the
orders in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 on 19.09.2024. As on
date, both the writ appeal and the contempt case are
pending on the file of this Court. (This criminal petition is
(filed on 13.12.2024) to quash the proceedings in Crime
No. 592 of 2024 (FIR Registered on 05.11.2024) on the file
of Vemulawada Town Police Station for offence under
Section 420).
9 JAK, J
13. The Events which occurred prior to the registering of
FIR need to be noted.
14(i). A letter dated 16.10.2024 was addressed by Collector
and District Magistrate of Rajanna Sircilla District to the
Revenue Divisional Officer (for short 'RDO'). The contents of
letter are as follows:
"Attention is invited to the reference cited, you
are required to submit the following documents in
case of Vanaptla Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy,
in her affidavit in C.C.No.1937 of 2024.
1. She is claiming that, she is resident of
Anupuram Village of Vemulawada Rural Mandal
and it is appears to be fraud for taking advantage of
Land Acquisition amount by creating encumbrance,
you are required to submit details of Voter ID, F.P.
Shop details and Ration card, building permission
of the complainant and her husband.
2. Encumbrance of house no. connected link
document shall be submit of converting the land
and building in her name. which is claimed to be
her property in Anupuram Village.
You are required to submit original documents
of files, this details should reached to the under
signed by 05.00 PM on 17.10.2024."
14(ii). On the very same day, Office of RDO Vemulawada
addressed a letter to Tahsildar, Vemulawada, as
"Top Priority/Most Urgent". Contents of the letter are as
follows:
10 JAK, J
"Attention is invited to the reference cited, it is
submit to that, the District Collector, Rajanna
Siricilla has requested to submit the documents as
follows:
Smt Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jaganmohan
Reddy She is Calming the is resident of Annupuram
Village of Vemulwada Rural Mandal and it is
appears to be fraud for taking advantage of Land
Acquisition amount by the creating encumbrance,
you required to submit details of Voter Id, F.P Shop
details and Ration Card and building permission of
the complainant and her husband
Therefore, it is instructed to submit the
detailed report along with FSC Card, Voter ID and
Building permission Documents for taking further
necessary action in the matter."
14(iii). On receipt of the letter from the office of RDO,
a letter is addressed on the next day by Tahsildar,
Vemulawada Mandal to RDO. Following are the contents of
the letter:
"I invite kind attention to the reference cited,
wherein the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Vemulawada has instructed to submit the
documents like Voter card/Ration card/House
documents of Smt. Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jagan
Mohan Reddy.
In this regard I submit that, Smt. Vanapatla
Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy R/o Karimnagar
has personally appear before me today and she has
submitted some documents in her support and on
perusal of the estimation letter submitted by the
Executive Engineer, P.R.I. Jagtial
Lr.No.DB3/MMR/ANUPURAM/2010, Dt.19.03.2010
her name was entered at Sl.No.468 with house
number 7-13 and on porusal of the award passed by
the Special Deputy Collector, LA, Unit-VI,
Karimnagar an amount of Rs.5,87,291/-(Rupees
Five lakhs eighty seven thousand two hundred and
ninety one only).
11 JAK, J
Further I submit that, I have requested to
submit Voter card/Ration card pertains to
Anupuram village on this she has stated that, she
has no voter card/ration card pertains to Anupuram
village and she refused to give the sworn statement
that she is not having voter card/ration card or any
other documents which proofs that she is the
villager of Anupuram village.
Further I submit that, I have conducted
enquiry with the village elders of Anupuram village
and it is revealed that, she is having only one house
in the village, but she never resided in the village
only her mother and father is resided in the said
house and due to which his mother and father got
one plot in newly formed Anupuram R &R colony."
14(iv). Another letter dated 24.10.2024, emanated from
the Office of Collector Addressed to RDO. The contents of
the letter are as follows:
"Attention is invited to the references cited, the
District Collector, Rajanna Sircilla has instructed
to file Civil and Criminal proceedings to be
immediately started" as per the findings of the RDO,
Vemulawada..."
15. Pending contempt and writ appeal, Tahsildar,
Vemulawada, addressed a letter No.E/992/2024, dated
05.11.2024 (annexed at page No.8), to the Station House
Officer, Police Station Vemulawada. In the reference, two
letters are referred to. One bearing No.G2/73/2024 dated
24.10.2024 of Collector, Rajanna Sircilla District, and the
other letter bearing No.A/793/2024 of the RDO,
Vemulawada, dated 16.10.2024. Inviting the attention of
12 JAK, J
the Station House Officer to the letters referred (copies
enclosed to the letter dated 05.11.2024), a request was
made by the Tahsildar to book a case against the
petitioner/accused herein. The following are the contents
of the letter:
"Your attention is invited to the references
cited, while enclosing the references, you are
requested to book a case against Smt.Vanapatla
Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy on allegation that,
she has misguided the Hon'ble High Court of
Telangana in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 to get the R&R
benefits illegally as she is never resided in
Anupuram village, her parents constructed a house
in the name of Smt.Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jagan
Mohan Reddy with MMRP H.No.7-13 in Anupuram
village and she get the compensation for that house.
She is having no evidences with her to prove that
she is residing in Anupuram village.
Therefore you are requested to book a case
against Smt. Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan
Reddy for misguide the Hon'ble High Court of
Telangana to get the R&R benefits from Government
illegally and submit the FIR copy to the undersigned."
16. Pursuant to the letter from Tahsildar, the Station
House Officer, Vemulawada, registered an FIR on
05.11.2024 for an offence under Section 420 of IPC against
the petitioner/accused.
17. This Court perused the letter, dated 5.11.2024, and
the order of learned Single Judge dated 22.11.2023,
annexed at page No.9 of this criminal petition. It is
13 JAK, J
observed from the order of the learned Single Judge that
petitioner/accused herein was found eligible to get benefits
of R&R and that her name was directed to be included
in the name of beneficiary list of project displaced families.
The order of the learned Single Judge was not
implemented. A contempt case came to be filed for non-
compliance of the order. When queried, it is informed by
the counsel for petitioner that contempt case is pending as
on date (24.04.2025).
18. This Court, having perused the material on record,
cannot turn a blind eye to the fact that it was Collector
(Head of the District Administration) who on his own
volition, without any jurisdiction initiated steps to set the
criminal law into motion, in spite of the writ petition order
having found the petitioner eligible and having not
complied the order of learned single judge. This
undoubtedly fulfills the parameters of an act which is grave
and willful in nature, which cannot be condoned.
19. This Court, having considered the entire factual
matrix of the case and the submissions of the counsel for
14 JAK, J
petitioner/accused, initially was of the opinion whether it is
a fit case for initiating suo motu contempt proceedings
against the office of Collector for directing criminal
proceedings against petitioner/accused without any basis.
This Court appointed learned Senior Counsel Mr. Avinash
Desai as an amicus for assisting in the facts of the case, to
arrive at a finding whether acts of the office of Collector
amount are willful in nature (in spite of the orders of the
writ Court) and for setting the criminal law into motion,
thereby violating freedom of life and liberty of the
petitioner/accused guaranteed under Article 21 of the
Constitution of India.
20. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. Avinash Desai submitted
at length and invited the attention of this Court to various
provisions of the Contempt of Court Act, Articles of
Constitution and the Contempt Rules including the Hon'ble
Apex Court's judgments for invoking suo motu contempt
proceedings. This Court appreciates the assistance afforded
by the learned Senior Counsel.
15 JAK, J
21. Be that as it may, weighing the nature and gravity of
the issues on hand, this Court requested learned
Additional Advocate General to appear in this matter.
22. It is submitted by learned Additional Advocate
General that there were a large number of cases of the
nature as prayed for in writ petition, where benefits were
doled out. That on enquiry, it came to light that certain
individuals/citizens not entitled for benefits were granted
benefits. Hence, office of Collector initiated steps to
uncover such wrongful beneficiaries. It is further submitted
that writ petitions filed by ineligible individuals came to be
dismissed.
23. It is submitted by the Additional Advocate General
that in the case of the petitioner/accused, Writ Petition
bearing No.31271 of 2016 filed by her was allowed with
certain directions and that a Writ Appeal bearing No.688 of
2024 was preferred and is pending consideration on the file
of the Court and a contempt case filed against the District
Collector for non implementation of the order of High Court
16 JAK, J
in Writ Petition is pending on the file of the High Court as
on date.
24. While the Additional Advocate General was being
heard on the issue, a learned counsel Mr. Suresh Ram
sought permission of this Court to make submissions on
behalf of Collector. This Court was under the impression
that Mr. Suresh Ram was a Government Pleader and
permitted. It was contended by learned counsel
(Mr. Suresh Ram) that this Court has erred in law in
initiating contempt proceedings against the Collector.
Counsel argued vehemently (without filing Vakalat) placing
reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in
the State of Uttar Pradesh and others v. Association
of Retired Supreme Court and High Court Judges
at Allahabad and others 1 . The counsel fell in error in
making submissions, as if this Court has initiated
contempt proceedings against collector. Till date, this Court
has not initiated contempt proceedings. Having heard the
counsel, this Court made it clear to him, that it was
premature on his part to address on the issue, as this
MANU/SC/0003/2024
17 JAK, J
Court was only contemplating to initiate contempt
proceedings, but did not initiate any such proceedings.
This Court is not inclined to accept the contentions raised
by the learned counsel appearing independently without
there being a vakalat, when the Additional Advocate
General has been making submissions by appearing on
behalf of Collector and the other officers.
25. This Court is conscious of the fact that Collector and
RDO were not arrayed as parties to the criminal petition by
the petitioner/accused. It was submitted by the counsel
for petitioner/accused that the offices of Collector and RDO
were instrumental in driving the office of Tahsildar to
address a letter to the SHO requesting to book a case.
Having considered the submissions made, having perused
the record, it is apparent from the facts that the freedom of
life and liberty, of the petitioner/accused, guaranteed
under Article 21 of the constitution of India was at stake,
and setting the criminal law into motion without any basis.
Hence, this Court requested the Collector to be present
in the Court.
18 JAK, J
26. Learned Additional Advocate General requested this
Court not to initiate criminal contempt proceedings against
the offices of Collector and other authorities. He sought
time for filing counter affidavit. Having heard the Learned
Additional Advocate General, this Court with a view to
grant an opportunity, for better adjudication, as to whether
the acts of the Head of the District Administration
(Collector) and its officers were bona fide acts or acts willful
in nature, granted time for filing of counter affidavit for
narrating the events and explain the circumstances.
27. A counter affidavit came to be filed explaining the
circumstances under which the Office of Collector had to
initiate steps. The following are the contents of the counter
affidavit filed.
"5. I submit that I have the utmost respect for
all the orders passed by the Hon'ble Courts,
especially those issued passed by the Hon'ble High
Court. As a public servant, I consider it my solemn
duty to uphold and implement the directives of the
Hon'ble judiciary. I respectfully submit that I have
not violated any orders issued by this Hon'ble High
Court. Specifically, I affirm that I have complied
with Your Lordship's orders dated 22/11/2023,
passed in WP No. 31271 of 2016 by the Hon'ble
High Court, Hyderabad and in the event of any of
my acts of omission or commission were to be
construed as acts of disobedience of the orders of
this Honourable Court, I hereby tender my
unconditional apology for the same.
19 JAK, J
6. It is respectfully submitted that Hon'ble High
Court has passed the following order in WP No.
31271 of 2016 dated 22/11/2023 and the operative
portion is extracted hereunder as:
a...... "8. In view of the above findings, this Writ
petition is allowed by declaring that the petitioner is
eligible to receive the benefits under R & R policy as
the petitioner's family is a separate family under the
definition of the Project Displaced Family' as per
G.O.Ms. No.68, 1 & CAD (PW, LA. IV R & R)
Department, dated 08.04.2005. Therefore, the
respondents are directed to include the name of the
petitioner in the beneficiary list of Project Displaced
Families of Anupuram Village, Vemulawada Mandal
of erstwhile Karimnagar District and pay the
benefits under the said scheme as per the procedure
laid down in the scheme and further directed to
comply the above direction within eight (08) weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this order. There
shall be no order as to costs".
7. I respectfully submit that I have ordered the
Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulwada to file Civil
and Criminal Proceedings against the petitioner in
the Said C.C on dt. 22-10-2024, accordingly the
Revenue Divisional Officer, Vemulawada directed
the Tahsildar to file FIR vide his Lr.No.A/793/2024,
dt.26-10-2024, in turn Tahsildar, Vemulawada has
filed FIR No.592/2024, dt.05-11-2024 against the
petitioner that she has "misguided" the Hon'ble High
Court of Telangana in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 to get
the R&R Benefits illegally as she is never resided in
Anpuram village; this aspect and usage of the word
"misguided" along with all relevant material ought to
have been placed before the Division Bench in the
Writ Appeal preferred by the State; there was no
disrespect meant towards either the orders of this
Hon'ble Court or towards the Hon'ble Court. The
three letters that led to the institution of the
Criminal Case are annexed herewith for the kind
perusal of this Honourable Court. It is most
respectfully submitted that the first two letters did
not contain the word "misguided" but only by way of
inadvertence the said word was incorporated in the
third letter dt.05.11.2024; it is once again most
respectfully reiterated that the said word was not
used either in respect of the orders or in respect of
the Honourable Court.
20 JAK, J
8. I respectfully submit that I am the 2nd
Respondent in the above Contempt Case, serving in
the capacity of District Collector, Rajanna Sircilla
District, having assumed charge on 16th June 2024
from my predecessor. In compliance with Your
Lordships' orders, I have reviewed the office records
and I have issued an Lr.No.G2/73/2024,dated
08/01/2025 to the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Vemulwada, Rajanna Sircilla District particularly to
Respondent No.3, directing to process and disburse
the benefits as per the prescribed procedure and
compliance to add the Petitioner, Smt. Vanapatla
Kavitha, to the beneficiaries list under the "Project
Displaced Families" scheme for Anupuram Village,
Vemulwada Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District,
Telangana. Copy of the letter dt.08.01.2025 is
enclose herewith for the kind perusal of this
Honourable Court.
9. I respectfully submit that, The Revenue Divisional
Officer, Vemulawada has submitted the Proposal to
provide R&R Package vide his office
Lr.No.A/616/2024, dt. 17-03-2025, Accordingly the
same was submitted to R&R Commissioner,
Hyderabad vide Lr.No.G2/73/2024, dt. 18-03-2025.
10. In view there of your lordship's order dated
22/11/2023 in the above W.P.No.31271 of 2016
has been complied by me and in my respectful
submission does not require institution of Criminal
case proceedings or the same to be continued.
11. I respectfully submit that I have always held the
highest regard and utmost respect for the orders
passed by this Hon'ble Court and have diligently
strived to ensure their timely implementation. I
further state that I have never acted with any
intention to disregard, disobey, or dishonor the
orders of this Hon'ble Court, whether willfully or
otherwise. However, if this Hon'ble Court concludes
that there has been any violation on my part, I
humbly and unconditionally tender my sincere
apologies. I respectfully pray that this Hon'ble Court
be pleased to consider my submission and
exonerate me from the Criminal Case proceedings."
21 JAK, J
28. Additional counter affidavit is also filed, averments
are similar in nature. Contents of the additional counter
affidavit are as follows:
"4. I submit that I have the utmost respect for all
the orders passed by the Hon'ble Courts, especially
those issued passed by the Hon'ble High Court. As a
public servant, I consider it my solemn duty to
uphold and implement the directives of the Hon'ble
judiciary. I respectfully submit that I have not
violated any orders issued by this Hon'ble High
Court. Specifically, I affirm that I have complied
with his Lordship's orders dated 22/11/2023,
passed in WP No. 31271 of 2016 by the Hon'ble
High Court, Hyderabad and in the event of any of
my acts of omission or commission were to be
construed as acts of disobedience of the orders of
this Honorable Court, I hereby tender my
unconditional apology for the same.
5. It is respectfully submitted that Hon'ble High
Court has passed the following order in WP No.
31271 of 2016 dated 22/11/2023 and the operative
portion is extracted hereunder as:
a. "8. In view of the above findings, this Writ petition
is allowed by declaring that the petitioner is eligible
to receive the benefits under R & R policy as the
petitioner's family is a separate family under the
definition of the Project Displaced Family' as per
G.O.Ms. No.68, 1 & CAD (PW. LA. IV R & R)
Department, dated 08.04.2005. Therefore, the
respondents are directed to include the name of the
petitioner in the beneficiary list of Project Displaced
Families of Anupuram Village, Vemulawada Mandal
of erstwhile Karimnagar District and pay the
benefits under the said scheme as per the procedure
laid down in the scheme and further directed to
comply the above direction within eight (08) weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this order. There
shall be no order as to costs".
6. I respectfully submit that the Tahsildar,
Ellantakunta vide L.No. C/31/2024 on 21.10.2024
reported that, as per the local enquiry held in the
village, the villagers have stated that, Vanapatla
22 JAK, J
Kavitha @ Vade Laxmi w/o Jaganmohan Reddy is
recorded as voter at Sl.No.420 Part No. 299 of 30
Manakondur Assembly Constituency and her
husband name is also entered at SI.No.419 in this
part, her maternal village is Anupuram, and they
shifted to Karimnagar for livelihood since 20 years
back. Further, the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Vemulawada vide L.No.B/34/2021 dt: 19.10.2024
has reported that, as per the local enquiry held in
the village, it is revealed that, the petitioner having
only house in the Village, but she never resided in
the village, but her parents would reside in the said
house and due to which her parent got one plot in
the newly Formed Anupuram R&R Colony. The
District Panchayat Officer, Rajanna Sircilla has
submitted report on 19.10.2024, as per the
available records, the ownership of the H.No.4-37 is
recorded in the name of Vanapatla Chandraiah s/o
Narsimha Reddy during the years 2002-03 & 2003-
04, during the year 2004-05, Mylaram Venkaiah
S/o Singaraiah is recorded as owner of the house
and Vanapatla Kavitha w/o Jaganmohan Reddy is
recorded as owner with H.No.4-37/1 in the year
2007-08 and 2009-10. But, no records are available
in the Gram Panchayat/Office, the basis on which
the ownership was transferred in the name of
Vanapatla Kavitha.
7. I respectfully submit that, considering the reports
of the Tahsildar, Ellantakunta, Revenue Divisional
Officer, Vemulawada and the District Panchayat
Officer, Rajanna Sircilla, I had come to the
conclusion that Smt Vanapatla Kavitha seems to
have resorted to case of forgery and criminal
conspiracy and misrepresented before the Hon'ble
High Court and accordingly Instructed the Revenue
Divisional Officer, Vemulawada vide L.No.
G2/73/2024 dt: 24.10.2024 to file Civil & Criminal
proceedings against her, accordingly the Revenue
Divisional Officer, Vemulawada directed the
Tahsildar to file FIR vide his Lr.No.A/793/2024,
dt.26-10-2024, in turn Tahsildar, Vemulawada has
filed FIR No.592/2024, dt.05-11-2024 against the
petitioner that she has "misguided" the Hon'ble High
Court of Telangana in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 to get
the R&R Benefits illegally as she is never resided in
Anpuram village; this aspect and usage of the word
"misguided" along with all relevant material ought to
have been placed before the Division Bench in the
23 JAK, J
Writ Appeal preferred by the State; there was no
disrespect meant towards either the orders of this
Hon'ble Court or towards the Hon'ble Court. The
three letters that led to the institution of the
Criminal Case have already been placed before this
Hon'ble Court for the kind perusal of this Honorable
Court. It is most respectfully submitted that the first
two letters did not contain the word "misguided" but
only by way of inadvertence the said word was
incorporated in the third letter dt.05.11.2024; it is
once again most respectfully reiterated that the said
word was not used either in respect of the orders or
in respect of the Honorable Court.
8. I respectfully submit that I am the 2nd
Respondent in the above Criminal Petition, serving
in the capacity of District Collector, Rajanna Sircilla
District, having assumed charge on 16th June 2024
from my predecessor. In compliance with Your
Lordships' orders, I have reviewed the office records
and I have issued an Lr.No.G2/73/2024, dated
08/01/2025 to the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Vemulawada, Rajanna Sircilla District particularly
to Respondent No.2, directing to process and
disburse the benefits as per the prescribed
procedure and compliance to add the Petitioner,
Smt. Vanapatla Kavitha to the beneficiaries list
under the "Project Displaced Families" scheme for
Anupuram Village, Vemulwada Mandal, Rajanna
Sircilla District, Telangana, in spite of as per
G.O.Ms.No. 68, I&CADD, dt. 08.04.2005 chapter-V
section 5.4 -Every survey shall contain the following
village wise information of the project Affe4cted
Families. (a)member of families who are
permanently residing, practicing any trade,
occupation or vocation in the Project Affected Area,
(b) Project Affected Families who are likely to lose
their house, agricultural land, employment or are
alienated wholly or substantially from the main
source of their trade/occupation or vocation, (c)
Agricultural labour and non-agricultural laboures
(d) Project Affected Families who are or were having
possession of forest lands in the affected area prior
to the 13th day of December, 2005. (e) Vulnerable
persons such as the disabled, destitute, orphans,
widows, unmarried girls, abandoned women, or
persons above fifty years of age, who are not
provided or cannot immediately be provided with
alternative livelihood, and who are not otherwise
24 JAK, J
covered as part of family. (1) Families that are
landless (not having homestead land, agricultural
land, or either homestead or agricultural land) and
below poverty line, but residing continuously for a
period not less than three years in the affected area
preceding the date of declaration of the affected
area. The applicant is married and the applicant not
effected under this section. Despite knowing these
facts, I have honored the Hon'ble High Court orders
and issued proceedings to the RDO, Vemulawada to
extend the benefits subject to outcome of the Writ
Appeal.
9. I respectfully submit that, The Revenue Divisional
Officer, Vemulawada has submitted the Proposal to
provide R&R Package vide his office
Lr.No.A/616/2024, dt. 17-03-2025, Accordingly the
same was submitted to R&R Commissioner,
Hyderabad vide Lr.No.G2/73/2024, dt. 18-03-2025
and the R&R Commissioner, Hyderabad vide Lr.No.
279/CRR/SS/2011 Dt: 03.2025 has accorded
permission to extent the benefits to extend the
above R&R benefits as per the G.O. Ms.No. 68,
I&CAD (PW. LA.IV R & R) Department, Dt:
08.04.2005 to the Petitioner, Smt. Vanapatla
Kavitha. I respectfully submit that, I have issued
orders vide Proc. No. G2/73/2024, Dt: 04.04.2025,
to authorized to the R&R Officer & RDO,
Vemulawada to provide the benefits of the R&R
entitlements to the beneficiary i.e., Smt. Vanapatla
Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy R/o Anupuram
Village, VemulawadaMandal.
10. In view there of your lordship's order dated
22/11/2023 in the above W.P.No.31271 of 2016
has been complied by me and in my respectful
submission does not require institution of Criminal
case proceedings or the same to be continued.
11. I respectfully submit that I have always held the
highest regard and utmost respect for the orders
passed by this Hon'ble Court and have diligently
strived to ensure their timely implementation, I
further state that I have never acted with any
intention to disregard, disobey, or dishonor the
orders of this Hon'ble Court, whether willfully or
otherwise. I respectfully pray that this Hon'ble Court
be pleased to consider my submission and kindly
examine the ground for the pursuance and
25 JAK, J
hardship, I am honest officer for pertaining public
interest and close any further proceedings on
undersigned. I respectfully state that if the
proceedings are directed to be reflected in my ACR
(Annual Confidential Report) it would affect my
future prospects and hence I humbly request this
Hon'ble Court to close the proceedings by accepting
my unconditional apology. I have always strived to
fulfill the highest standards of honesty and carry
out my duties in a dutiful manner.
12. I respectfully submit that as per the All India
Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968 rule-3(1) Every
member of the service shall at all times maintain
absolute integrity and devotion to duty and shall do
noting which is unbecoming of a member of the
service. (1A) Every member of the service shall
maintain: (i) high ethical standards, integrity and
honesty (ii) political neutrality (iii) promoting of the
principles of merit, fairness and impartiality in the
discharge of duties (iv) accountability and
transparency and as per (2B) (iv) take decisions
solely in public interest and use or cause to use
public resources efficiently, effectively and
economically. In this case I have discharged my
duties as per AIS rules and Honorable Court be
pleased to close further proceedings in the interest
of justice as deemed."
29. Learned Additional Advocate General placed on
record a copy of letter dated 23.04.2025 addressed by the
Tahsildar, Vemulawada to SHO which is as follows:
"Your attention is invited to the references
cited, wherein you are requested to book a criminal
case Smt.Vanapatla Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan
Reddy through the reference 1st cited.
Through the reference 2nd cited, the District
Collector, Rajanna Sircilla has instructed to
withdraw the complaint against Smt.Vanapatla
Kavitha W/o Jagan Mohan Reddy as necessary
benefits are being provided to the individual.
26 JAK, J
Accordingly, the complaint which is submitted
through the reference 1st cited is hereby
withdrawing."
30. This Court, having perused the counter affidavit and
the additional counter filed by the District Collector, is of
the opinion that the averments made are self serving in
nature. On a perusal of the correspondence between the
offices of Collector, RDO and Tahsildar and the letter
addressed to SHO by Tahsildar and the letter dated
23.04.2025, that the criminal law was into motion by
registering an FIR in spite of the High Court finding the
petitioner/accused eligible for benefits and directing the
authorities to consider the petitioner as project displaced
family (directions of this Court in W.P.No.31271 of 2016,
by order dated 22.11.2023).
31. From the contents of letter date 23.04.2025 it is
apparent that necessary benefits were being granted to the
petitioner/accused, after setting the criminal law into
motion, to get over the acts which evidently are willful in
nature and without any basis of law.
27 JAK, J
32. From the letter dated 16.10.2024 of the Collector and
District Magistrate, it is evident from the contents, that the
Collector was of the opinion that a fraud was played taking
advantage of the land acquisition amount by creating
encumbrance. It is further observed that Collector
specifically stated that files should reach by 05:00 p.m. on
17.10.2024. It is also a fact which is borne on record that
on the very same day, office of RDO addressed a letter to
Tahsildar which reflected the contents of the letter of
collector verbatim. Letter dated 24.10.2024, was addressed
from the office of District Collector to the RDO, the
contents of letter are extracted supra.
33. In the letter dated 24.10.2024 from office of District
Collector, District Collector has instructed to file civil and
criminal proceedings immediately as per the findings of
RDO, Vemulawada, submitted vide reference dated
22.10.2024. Undeniably, the FIR lodged is on the basis of
the letter addressed on 24.10.2024 by the office of
Collector. This is the root cause and the genesis of the
letter dated 05.11.2024 of Tahsildar, Vemulawada, to the
28 JAK, J
Station House Officer and it is on the basis of this letter
dated 05.11.2024, FIR came to be registered.
34. A query was put to learned Additional Advocate
General as to how the Collector upon himself can initiate
civil and criminal proceedings without any authority of law,
in spite of the order in the writ petition, a contempt
case pending on the file of this Court, a writ appeal which
is also pending and there being no interim order in the
writ appeal (in favour of the appellant-State). Learned
Additional Advocate General pleaded that the officer has
tendered an apology unconditionally in the counter
affidavit.
35. In the present facts and circumstances of the case,
on perusal of the record, it is apparent that District
Collector/Executive Head of the District Administration
has not only displayed a disregard to the Rule of Law by
his acts, but, tried to circumvent the orders of Court of law,
by directing his officers to initiate civil and criminal
proceedings. This Court is not inclined to delve or consider
any grounds raised in the other pending proceedings before
29 JAK, J
this Court. Criminal proceedings initiated on the basis of
the District Collector's letter dated 24.10.2024 is the
concern of this Court, but, for which FIR would not have
been registered.
36. Complaint is made by Tahsildar, by way of a
communication to SHO dated 05.11.2024. Offence under
section 420 is registered in crime no. 592 of 2024 on the
file of Vemulawada Town Police Station.
Section 420 is as follows:
"420. Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery
of property.--Whoever cheats and thereby
dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver
any property to any person, or to make, alter or
destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security,
or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is
capable of being converted into a valuable security,
shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to seven
years, and shall also be liable to fine."
37. A Three Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in
A.M. Mohan v. The State Represented By SHO And
Another (SLP (Criminal) No. 9598 of 2022) dealing with
Section 420 of IPC held as follows:
"This Court, in the case of Prof. R.K.
Vijayasarathy and Another v. Sudha Seetharam
and Another 2 has culled out the ingredients to
(2019) 16 SCC 739
30 JAK, J
constitute the offence under Sections 415 and 420
of IPC, as under:
"15. Section 415 of the Penal Code reads thus:
"415. Cheating.--Whoever, by deceiving any
person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces
the person so deceived to deliver any property
to any person, or to consent that any person
shall retain any property, or intentionally
induces the person so deceived to do or omit to
do anything which he would not do or omit if
he were not so deceived, and which act or
omission causes or is likely to cause damage
or harm to that person in body, mind,
reputation or property, is said to "cheat"."
16. The ingredients to constitute an offence of
cheating are as follows:
16.1. There should be fraudulent or dishonest
inducement of a person by deceiving him:
16.1.1. The person so induced should be
intentionally induced to deliver any property to any
person or to consent that any person shall retain
any property, or
16.1.2. The person so induced should be
intentionally induced to do or to omit to do anything
which he would not do or omit if he were not so
deceived; and
16.2. In cases covered by 16.1.2. above, the act or
omission should be one which caused or is likely to
cause damage or harm to the person induced in
body, mind, reputation or property.
17. A fraudulent or dishonest inducement is an
essential ingredient of the offence. A person who
dishonestly induces another person to deliver any
property is liable for the offence of cheating.
18. Section 420 of the Penal Code reads thus:
"420. Cheating and dishonestly
inducing delivery of property.--
Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly
induces the person deceived to deliver
any property to any person, or to make,
alter or destroy the whole or any part of a
valuable security, or anything which is
31 JAK, J
signed or sealed, and which is capable of
being converted into a valuable security,
shall be punished with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may
extend to seven years, and shall also be
liable to fine."
19. The ingredients to constitute an offence under
Section 420 are as follows:
19.1. A person must commit the offence of cheating
under Section 415; and
19.2. The person cheated must be dishonestly
induced to
(a) deliver property to any person; or
(b) make, alter or destroy valuable security or
anything signed or sealed and capable of being
converted into valuable security.
20. Cheating is an essential ingredient for an act to
constitute an offence under Section 420."
12. A similar view has been taken by this Court
in the cases of Archana Rana v. State of Uttar
Pradesh and Another 3, Deepak Gaba and Others
v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, and
Mariam Fasihuddin and Another v. State by
Adugodi Police Station and Another 4.
13. It could thus be seen that for attracting the
provision of Section 420 of IPC, the FIR/complaint
must show that the ingredients of Section 415 of
IPC are made out and the person cheated must have
been dishonestly induced to deliver the property to
any person; or to make, alter or destroy valuable
security or anything signed or sealed and capable of
being converted into valuable security. In other
words, for attracting the provisions of Section 420 of
IPC, it must be shown that the FIR/complaint
discloses:
(i) the deception of any person;
(ii) fraudulently or dishonestly inducing
that person deliver any property to any
person; and
(iii) dishonest intention of the accused at
the time of making inducement."
(2021) 3 SCC 751 : 2021 INSC 135
2024 SCC OnLine SC 58 : 2024 INSC 49
32 JAK, J
38. On a perusal of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex
Court, it is apparent that the fraudulent and dishonest
inducement of any person has to make out from inception.
39. In the present case the High Court on facts held that
the petitioner/accused was eligible for R&R benefits and
directed to be declared eligible to be a member of Project
Displaced Families. In spite of the High Court holding that
the petitioner is eligible for grant of R&R benefits, criminal
law has been set into motion on the ground that petitioner
has misguided the Court and obtained order. In fact the
word fraud has been used in the letters of the offices of
district administration and an offence under Section 420 is
registered.
40. It defies the logic of this Court as to how the office of
District Collector can afford to conclude in such manner,
when it is evident from the order of the High Court that the
petitioner was found eligible for R&R benefits and the
direction to include the name of the petitioner/accused in
the list of Project Displaced Families beneficiary list. It is
an overreach by the office of District Collector,
33 JAK, J
impermissible under law, District Collector traversed
beyond the orders of this High Court and in fact without
jurisdiction. No Offence is be made out from the facts and
circumstances of the case.
41. This is sheer abuse of process of law, the office of
District Collector acted contrary to known facets of law by
directing to register a criminal case.
42. It is brought to the notice of this Court the criminal
proceedings initiated have been withdrawn. It is a clear
case of non adherence to Rule of Law. The fact that
proceedings were withdrawn is indicative enough that the
office of District Collector has acted in disregard to Rule of
Law curbing the freedom of life and liberty in a manner
unknown to law.
43. The Office of District Collector ignored the fact of
pending contempt proceedings and pending Writ Appeal on
the file of this High Court and issued such directions,
which are impermissible under law. The point which needs
34 JAK, J
to be considered is, what is/where is the genesis of the
criminal proceedings.
44. This Court is conscious of the fact that this is
a Criminal Petition filed under Section 528 of BNS
(Sec: 482 Cr.P.C). Section 528 in Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is as follows:
"528. Saving of inherent powers of High Court:
Nothing in this Sanhita shall be deemed to limit or
affect the inherent powers of the High Court to
make such orders as may be necessary to give effect
to any order under this Sanhita, or to prevent abuse
of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure
the ends of justice."
45. Question which further falls for consideration is what
amounts to, an abuse of process of law, in the present facts
of the case. The high Court by its order in W.P.No.31271 of
2016 dated 22.11.2023 held that the accused/petitioner
herein is an eligible person to receive R&R benefits.
Whether the act of initiating criminal proceedings on the
basis of instructions of District Collector (arrayed as a
party in the writ petition), without complying the order of
learned Single Judge curtailing the freedom of life and
35 JAK, J
liberty, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of
India, is bona fide.
46. The jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of
BNSS is to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or
otherwise to secure the ends of justice. It is an inherent
power to be exercised to secure ends of justice in a given
case. Once a complaint is lodged and an FIR is registered,
Criminal law is set in motion. In other words, the
complaint is the genesis for criminal law to be set into
motion. The basis of the complaint is not bona fide, act or
acts of District Collector and authorities directing to initiate
criminal proceedings definitely amounts to abuse of
process of Court, impacting the life and liberty of
individual, violating Art 21 of The Constitution of India.
The criminal petition deserves to be allowed. The genesis
undoubtedly is on the basis of directions emanating from
the office of District Collector.
47. Good governance is the hall mark of the offices of
State Government, Officers manning the district
administration, cannot initiate criminal proceedings,
36 JAK, J
without there being any basis as required under law.
Issuing directions to initiate civil and criminal proceedings
curbing the freedom of life and liberty guaranteed under
Article 21 of Constitution of India is not a bona fide act.
48. Rule of Law is supreme, no officer of State
Government can initiate proceedings in disregard of Rule of
Law, if such violations are permitted, it would be antithesis
to Rule of Law and such acts are impermissible under law,
they need deterrent action.
49. Learned Additional Advocate General submitted that
necessary benefits are being provided to individual and FIR
registered on 15.11.2024 for the offence under Section 420
of IPC are withdrawn. Learned Additional Advocate General
quoted:
"To Err is Human, To Forgive is Divine."
50. This Court takes note of the quote. But, whether the
acts of head of the district administration of a district are
mere mistakes or errors committed inadvertently or in
disregard to Rule of Law have to be determined from the
facts and circumstances of the case. Acts perpetrated are
37 JAK, J
grave in nature, as held supra, are not bona fide, such acts
if permitted to go unchecked in a democratic set up, would
lead to chaos, upsetting the very fabric of the democratic
society. District Administration has to be responsible and
function within the bounds of law, any overreach would not
only be an impediment for efficient and effective
administration, but would also erode the faith of citizens in
a democratic setup.
51. Having considered the entire factual matrix of the
case this Court is of the opinion that the office of Chief
Secretary for the State of Telangana, shall take note of the
acts committed by the District Collector, which exhibit a
disregard for Rule of Law, this Court expresses its strong
displeasure of such acts of District Collector which
curtailed the life and liberty of petitioner/accused for
reasons unknown to law, violating Article 21 of The
Constitution of India. This Court deems it appropriate that
the office of Chief Secretary be directed to reprimand the
District Collector, so that he restrains himself in future
from committing such acts. Initially, this Court was
38 JAK, J
inclined to take a firm action, but, it restrains itself keeping
in view the long tenure of the Officer. The Chief Secretary is
directed reprimand the officer, as held supra.
52. This Court appreciates the submissions made by the
Additional Advocate General, yet, in the facts and
circumstances, this Court cannot ignore the acts of district
collector directing respondent No.2, through the offices of
RDO to initiate civil and criminal proceedings against the
petitioner/accused. This Court also expresses its deep
appreciation for the assistance rendered by the Learned
Senior Counsel Avinash Desai.
53. Office no less than that of District Collector, Head,
District Administration, played a pivotal role and is
instrumental in initiating the criminal proceedings.
It reflects the office of District Collector in poor light.
Disrespect for Rule of Law and the orders of this Court, is
apparent from the facts and the acts. Acts perpetrated
shocks the conscience of this Court, nothing more is to be
penned.
39 JAK, J
54. For reasons aforesaid, the Criminal Petition deserves
to be allowed. Proceedings in Crime (FIR) No.592 of 2024
on the file of Vemulawada Town Police Station, Rajanna
Sircilla District, registered for offence under Section 420 of
IPC vide FIR dated 05.11.2024 deserves to be quashed.
55. Be that as it may, as it is informed to this Court that
the criminal proceedings initiated are withdrawn, no orders
are required to be passed. Criminal Petition stands allowed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall
stand closed.
___________________________
ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI, J
Date: 23.09.2025
Note: 1. Registry is directed to forward a copy
of this order to the Chief Secretary
for the State of Telangana.
2. L.R. copy be marked
(B/o)
PLP/KRR
