Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K.LAKSHMAN
Nethi Vidyasagar – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent
ORDER :
K. LAKSHMAN, J.
Heard Smt. Devineni Radha Rani, learned counsel representing Sri M.Rajender Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Smt. Shalini Saxena, learned counsel representing Sri Palle Nageshwara Rao, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for State. Despite service of notice, there is no representation on behalf of 2nd respondent.
2. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘BNSS’) to quash the cognizance order dated 28.03.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 504 of IPC and Section 3(1) (r ) (s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Amendment Act, 2015) (for short, the SC&ST Act’) and issuing summons to the petitioner herein/accused in SC.SPL.No.46 of 2024 by the Special Sessions Court for SCs/STs (POA) Act, 1989, Nalgonda.
Facts of the case:-
3. On the complaint dated 01.11.2023, the Police, Kattangoor Police Station, have registered a case in Cr.No.185 of 2023 against the petitioner herein. In the said complaint, 2nd respondent stated that he was working as a Member of Flying Squad Team (FST) team and he was on election duty in Kattangoor. It came to
The court quashed the cognizance order due to lack of credible evidence, unexplained delay in lodging the complaint, and absence of eyewitnesses, indicating an abuse of process of law.
Delay in lodging a complaint and lack of sufficient evidence obscured intent to humiliate under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, leading to quashing of proceedings.
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental under Article 21, and significant delays in filing complaints can undermine their credibility and warrant quashing of proceedings.
The court quashed proceedings against the accused due to lack of prima facie evidence and emphasized the need for compelling reasons to invoke inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
The absence of public view during the alleged incident and lack of independent witnesses led to the quashing of the FIR under the Atrocity Act and IPC.
The court emphasized that quashing proceedings requires compelling reasons, particularly when allegations are vague and unsupported by evidence.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
