THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

ORDER:

This criminal petition is filed by the petitioner-sole accused seeking to quash the proceedings in CC No.1586 of 2025 on the file of XII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal-Malkajgiri at Kukatpally, for the offences under Sections 270, 280 and 292 of BNS and Section 15 of the Environment Protection Act (for short ‘EP Act’).

2. Heard Mr. Syed Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the allegations in the complaint do not attract the alleged offences against the petitioner. He further submitted that the police received a ‘Dial 100’ complaint that there was sound pollution with huge sound systems at NRC Gardens, Kukatpally, and that on enquiry, the Event Manager was identified and the present crime is registered against him with all false allegations. He further submitted that there is no mention about the noise limit of the alleged sound system and that no instrument is seized from the petitioner and hence, he prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that in a marriage reception event, they put high sound systems causing noise pollution and the petitioner is the event manager, who conducted the event and that during the course of investigation, no instrument was seized from the petitioner.

5. Perused the record.

6. A perusal of the complaint does not disclose the details of the sound pollution. However, it is mentioned that the police received a complaint on ‘Dial 100’ that there is a sound pollution at NRC Gardens and when they approached there, they have noticed that a marriage reception was going on and that the complaint is lodged against the Event Organizer. Even if it is believed that the said marriage reception has created a sound pollution, the Event Manager cannot be made responsible for the same as he can act only as per the instructions of the host, who is conducting the actual reception. An Event Organizer would act upon the specifications made by the interested person, who conducts the function on the given date, but the Event Organizer cannot act on his own whims and fancies. Admittedly, the petitioner is the sole accused and he is mentioned as an Event Organizer even in the complaint and in the FIR. Thus, at no stretch of imagination, the petitioner can be held solely responsible for the alleged sound pollution. Further, the details of sound pollution are also not mentioned in the complaint. Hence, it is opined that continuance of proceedings against the petitioner would be abuse of process of law.

7. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed, quashing the proceedings against the petitioner in CC No.1586 of 2025 on the file of XII Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Medchal-

Malkajgiri.

Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________________ JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA October 28, 2025 KTL