SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 37400

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
Koduri Madhuri – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
CRLP 15038/2025



ORDER:-

1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 in C.C.No.1022 of 2024, on the file of the learned IX Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Medchal, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 448, 323 and 509 read with 34 of IPC.

2. Heard Sri G.Rajeshwar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 who appeared through online as well as Sri Jitender Rao Veeramalla, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1- State.

3. Learned petitioners’ counsel submitted that the allegations alleged against the petitioners are false in nature and that no such alleged incident has ever occurred. In fact, the defacto complainant has taken Rs.5,00,000/- from the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 and when they asked her to return the money, this complaint has been foisted falsely to avoid payment of the said money. He therefore prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioners.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the prosecution could record the statements of eye witnesses and that their statements have to be tested during the course of trial.

5. Perused the record. The contents of the complaint and the recitals of charge sheet point out allegations against the petitioners under Sections 448, 323 and 509 read with 34 of IPC. LWs 2 to 4 are the eye witnesses to the incident. Their veracity needs to be tested during the course of trial. The truth or otherwise in the allegations can be culled out only after a full-fledged trial. Considering the submissions made by both parties and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the Criminal Petition by dispensing with the appearance of the petitioners before the Trial Court.

6. Hence, the Criminal Petition is disposed of dispensing with the presence of the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 4 before the Trial Court provided that the petitioners are represented through an Advocate on every date of hearing and that they shall be present before the Trial Court whenever their presence is specifically required during the course of trial.

7. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________________

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top