ORDER:

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioners to call for the records pertaining to FIR No.434 of 2024 on the file of Station House Officer, Ramachandrapuram Police Station, Cyberabad, Hyderabad and to quash the same. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 509, 506, 504, 201 and 500 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘I.P.C’).

2. The facts of the case are that the 3rd respondent filed a complaint stating that she is working in Canara Bank, that Tejeswara Rao Killari, Mrs Adhikari Sharmila, Mrs Haritha Chalasani, Mrs Kiranmayi Adabala, Vadnala Naresh, A. Avinash Reddy and B.Srinivas for their involvement in defamation through circulation of alleged whatsapp screenshots intended to demean her character, integrity and privacy and to damage her reputation and her family. It is further stated that she is distressed by the activities taken by him, which constitutes a breach of professional conduct, defamation and character assassination and the contents of conversation is not only false and fabricated but also highly defamatory damaging her personal, professional reputation, social identity, modesty and character. The dissemination of the screenshots has lead to a hostile work environment, causing significant emotional distress and harm. It is also stated that the 1st petitioner along with branch staff V.Naresh and others have tampered the bank C.C. T.V. footage of the incident to cover up the inappropriate behavior of 1st petitioner, which is not only unethical, but also illegal. It is also stated that the investigating officer U.Rajeshari, Divisional Manager, Canara Bank, Regional Office, Ranga Reddy orally threatened and harassed her in the Bank’s internal enquiry which made her to undergo severe psychological trauma. Since 21.06.2024 she is not able to go to office because of the above horrifying threatening and harassment and all the above persons have caused her transfer threat, job threat, identity threat to her and her family and that she is in a terrified situation and that there is a life threat to her and her family members by the above persons. Therefore, she requested to take severe action against above persons. Basing on the said complaint, the police registered a case in Cr.No.434 of 2024 for the above offences.

3. Heard Sri P.S.Rajasekhar, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for home appearing for respondents 1 and 2. Even though notice is served on the 3rd respondent none appeared on her behalf.

4. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the 1st petitioner is an officer in Canara Bank appointed in the year 2015 and when he was posted in Ramachandrapuram Branch as Manager, the 3rd respondent was working as Clerk in the same branch. The 3rd respondent has mental health issues and she is a habitual complainant and indulged in making false and baseless allegations against many persons. She made one such complaint against the 1st petitioner before higher authorities. The higher authorities appointed one Smt U. Rajeswari as investigating officer and on detailed enquiry, the 1st petitioner was found not guilty of the alleged imaginary allegations made by the 3rd respondent. He further contended that the 3rd respondent bore grudge against 1st petitioner and in pursuant thereof, she is continuously making false and baseless allegations even against the investigating officer. The 1st petitioner was transferred from Ramachandrapuram branch to Kaveli Branch on 10.06.2024. The 3rd respondent filed complaint on 03.07.2024 before the 2nd respondent against the petitioners herein. The 3rd respondent is suffering from mental health issues and she has been recommended counselling and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for four sessions per week which clearly shows that the allegations are figment of imagination of 3rd respondent. The 2nd petitioner was not even an employee of Canara Bank and she does not have any