THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.13260 of 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-accused seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.115 of 2025 on the file of I-Town Police Station, Kothagudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem, for the offences under Sections 336(3), 338, 339 and 340 of BNS.

2. Heard Sri Mohd. Islamuddin Ansari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1-State.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner got voluntary suspension certificate by the Bar Council of Telangana on 03.08.2024 and thereafter, he applied for the post of Special Judicial Magistrate of II Class on 05.08.2024. The grievance of the petitioner is that knowing fully-well about the rule position, an advocate, by name, M. Rajamullu, who is still practicing, was appointed as Special Judicial Magistrate of II Class and hence, he submitted a representation to the High Court. Thus, his contention is that appointment of M. Rajamullu is illegal. Thereafter, the present complaint is lodged against the petitioner alleging that he has moved a copy application seeking certified copies of the report of an Advocate Commissioner in MVOP No.106 of 2023 and MVOP No.57 of 2024 in the name of other advocates for the purpose of verification and when the copyist approached the said advocates, they denied to have moved such applications. Thereupon, the advocate clerk was summoned and further on inquiry, it came to light that the petitioner has asked him to file copy applications in the said MVOPs, and the copy applications were filed in the name of other advocates, but not in the name of the petitioner and that they were signed by the petitioner himself by forging the signatures of two advocates for obtaining the copies of report of the advocate commissioner in two MVOP cases. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is facing false allegations just because he raised his voice against the illegal appointment of Rajamallu as Special Judicial Magistrate of II Class and that he is facing harassment and mental agony due to the present false complaint and therefore, he prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner and if not to give a direction to the police concerned to invoke the procedure laid down under Section

35(3) of BNSS.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the complainant is the Administrative Officer of the concerned District Court and on thorough verification in the Section and after examining the concerned people, the present complaint has been lodged stating that the signatures of the other advocates are forged by the petitioner herein, and therefore, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

5. Perused the record.

6. Though the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the allegation of forgery is not applicable to the petitioner herein, the prime allegation in the case is that the petitioner has forged the signatures of other advocates for obtaining certified copies of certain documents. Thus, the allegation under Section 338 of BNSS cannot be set aside. Hence, the prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioner to consider for invoking procedure under Section 35 (3) of BNSS also cannot be considered. Thus, it is opined that the petition lacks merit and hence, the same is liable to be dismissed.

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________________ JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA October 29, 2025 KTL