IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
Padamati Suman Reddy – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
CRLP 10/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10 of 2026 Date: 06.01.2026 Between:
Padamati Suman Reddy ...Petitioner AND The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad and another ...Respondents
ORDER
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner/accused No.2 seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.284 of 2023 on the file of learned XIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Hayatnagar, Ranga Reddy District.
2. Heard Sri M.Rameshwar Rao, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that accused No.1 sold the property to accused No.2 and that accused No.2 is a bona fide purchaser. When he is the owner of the property, he cannot be alleged to be a trespasser on the subject land. He, therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. 4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that accused No.1 sold the property to the de facto complainant and thereafter sold it again to accused No.2, and thus the dispute arose between the two. The allegations prima facie point out that the petitioner has trespassed into the land of the de facto complainant. He, therefore, prayed to dismiss the petition.
5. Perused the record.
6. The contents of the complaint and the recitals in the charge sheet point out the allegations against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 447, 427, 506, and 120(B) of the IPC. LWs.2 and 3 are the eyewitnesses whose evidence needs to be tested during the course of the trial. Thus, the proceedings against the petitioner cannot be quashed at this juncture. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to dispense with the presence of the petitioner before the trial Court.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is disposed of dispensing with the presence of the petitioner before the trial court provided that he is represented by a counsel before the trial court on every date of hearing and shall appear before the trial court whenever his presence is required during the course of trial.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
_____________________________
JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA Date: 06.01.2026 Lk THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10 of 2026 Dated:06.01.2026 lk
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.