THE HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.14942 of 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 petitioner/accused in C.C.No.1039 of 2019, on the file of the learned Principal Junior Civil Judge-cum-VII Metropolitan Magistrate at Medchal, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 447 and 427 of IPC and Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property (PDPP) Act, 1984.

2. Heard Sri Kaluvala Venkata Vara Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused as well as Sri Jitender Rao Veeramalla, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1- State.

3. Learned petitioner’s counsel submits that the petitioner has not trespassed into the Government land as alleged by the defacto complainant and that he is a bonafide purchaser and none of the witnesses in this case have stated anything mentioning that the petitioner had occupied the alleged land. He therefore prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that a letter dated 22.11.2017 was addressed by the Mandal Girdawar, Shamirpet Mandal to the Station House Officer, Shamirpet Police Station, alleging that the petitioner has occupied the land in Sy.No.120 of laxmapur Village, which pertains to the Government. But four days prior to the said letter, an Agreement- of- Sale-cum- General Power of Attorney had been executed in favour of the petitioner herein by the alleged vendor. The petitioner, under the guise of the said Agreement- of- sale cum- General Power of Attorney, has occupied the Government Land. He therefore prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. 5. Perused the record. The letter dated 22.11.2017 addressed by the Mandal Girdawar, Shamirpet Mandal, to the Station House officer points out that the petitioner herein has occupied the Government land in Sy.No.120 of Lakshmapur Village under the guise of the Agreement of Sale –cum- General Power of Attorney that was executed with regard to Sy.Nos.81/A and 82/A admeasuring Ac.10.00 gts. Thus, the allegations specifically point out the offences under Sections 447 and 427 of IPC and Section 3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property (PDPP) Act, 1984, against the petitioner herein. The contention of the petitioner’s counsel is that none of the witnesses have stated about the alleged trespass, but the letter addressed by the Tahsildar and the recitals of charge sheet point out specific allegations. The truth or otherwise in the allegations and the strength of the documents need to be tested during the course of trial. Therefore, 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 petitioner/accused before the Trial Court provided that the petitioner is represented through an Advocate on every date of hearing and that he shall be present before the Trial Court whenever his presence is specifically required during the course of trial.

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

____________________________ JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA Dt.17.11.2025 ysk THE HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.14942 of 2025 Dt.17.11.2025 ysk