The court affirmed that simultaneous trials for criminal cases involving cross-allegations are necessary to determine the aggressors and defenders, rejecting the quashment of proceedings based on claims of ulterior motives.

ORDER :

N.TUKARAMJI CRIMINAL, J.

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS , 2023’) seeking quashment of the proceedings in C.C.No.616 of 2024 on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Juvenile Court), Jangaon, against the petitioner.

2. The petitioner is arrayed as accused No.2 in C.C.No.616 of 2024 charged for the offences punishable under Sections 294(b), 324, 506 read with Section 34 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (for short ‘I.P.C.’).

3. I have heard Mr.P.Sasidhar Reddy, learned counsel, representing Mr.R.S.Sumith Raj, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, representing the respondent No.1-State.

4. The prosecution case in brief is that the respondent No.2/de- facto complainant and accused No.3 in the Calendar Case are brothers and the accused No.1, the petitioner/accused No.2 are sons of accused No.3. In the backdrop of civil disputes, on 17.01.2024, accused Nos.1 to 3 attacked the respondent No.2/de facto complainant and his family members with rods, sticks and axe and threatened them with dire consequences. Upon filing the final result, the Court has taken cognizance of the offence under Sections 294((b), 324 and 506 read with 34 of IPC and numbered the Calendar Case 616 of 2024.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the de facto complainant had foisted the false case to counter blast the police report filed by the accused No.3 in C.C.No.616 of 2024 on 17.01.2024 contending that the respondent No.2/de facto complainant herein along with his sons illegally trespassed into the land owned and in possession of the accused No.3 with a tractor and destroyed the standing crop, assaulted accused Nos.1 to 3 with sticks and spades and threatened with dire consequences. On such report, case in Crime No.14 of 2024 for the offences under Sections 447 , 427, 290, 324, 506 read with 34 of IPC was registered against the respondent No.2/de facto complainant herein and his sons. That apart the petitioner/accused No.2 has successfully cleared the Group-IV Service examinations conducted by the Telangana State Public Service Commission and his final selection has been withheld due to the pendency of the present criminal case, which was foisted to jeopardize his employment prospects. He further asserted that there is no material placed to prove the alleged offences and the criminal proceedings are maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive and to pressurize the accused No.3 in settling the pre- existing civil disputes. Additionally, even by the police report no ingredients to attract the alleged offences are being made out. On the other hand, pleaded that the alleged overt acts of the petitioner shall be considered as acts of private defence. Thus, prayed for quashment of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner.

6. In support of his pleadings the learned counsel had cited the judgments (i) Thavalingam and another v. State by Inspector of Police – 2019 SCC OnLine Mad 33284; (ii) Hasin Jahan and others v. State of West Bengal and another – 2024 SCC OnLine Cal 9113; (iii) Sugurappa and others v. State of Karnataka – 2023 SCC OnLine Kar 165; (iv) Manik Taneja and another v. State of Karnataka and another – (2015) 7 SCC 423 ; (v) Ashok Kumar Gupta v. State of Uttar Pradesh and another – (2017) 11 SCC 239 ; (vi) Mahind