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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 1479

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
Pechetti Devasish – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
CRLP 261/2026



IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.261 of 2026 DATE OF ORDER:- 09.01.2026 Between:

Pechetti Devasish, S/o.Satyanarayana, R/o.Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

… Petitioner/Accused AND The State of Telangana rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad & another.

…Respondents

ORDER

1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking to quash Section 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, in C.C.No.463 of 2025, on the file of the learned Special Judge for Speedy Trial and Disposal of cases on Fraudulent Drawls and Misappropriation of Scholarship amounts in Social Welfare, Tribal Welfare and Backward Classes Departments (Embezzlement of Funds in Social Welfare Department)-cum- II Additional Special Judge for Trial of SPE, ACB cases –cum- Special Judge for Trial of cases under PDPP Act at Hyderabad, registered against the petitioner herein by terminating all further proceedings in respect of the same, as illegal and arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of PDPP Act, 1984.

2. Heard Sri Gurram Venkat Ramana, 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 submitted that Section 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 does not attract in the present case as there was no dishonest intention on part of the petitioner herein in causing the accident and that even according to the complaint, the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle and thus, no dishonest intention can be attributed against the petitioner. He therefore prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner herein under Section 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property (PDPP) Act.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition.

5. Perused the record. The petitioner herein is alleged to have committed an accident by driving a car bearing No.TS-07-GQ-6693 in a rash and negligent manner in a drunken condition. Thus, the Police of Pet Basheerbad Police Station registered a case in Crime No.05 of 2025 under Sections 125(a) and 324(4) of BNS, 2023; Section 4 of PDPP Act, 1984 and Sections 184 and 185 of Motor Vehicles Act. However, it is pertinent to refer Sections 3 & 4 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property (PDPP) Act, 1984, which are extracted hereunder for the sake of convenience:-

“3. Mischief causing damage to public property:- –(1)Whoever commits mischief by doing any act in respect of any public property, other than public property of the nature referred to in sub-section (2), shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and with fine.

(2) Whoever commits mischief by doing any act in respect of any public property being –

2 The Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 a. any building, installation or other property used in connection with the production, distribution or supply of water, light, power or energy;

b. any oil installation; c. any sewage work;

d. any mine or factory;

e. any means of public transportation or of tele- communications, or any building, installation or other property used in connection therewith. shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months, but which may extend to five years and with fine:

Provided that the Court may, for reasons to be recorded in its judgment, award a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than six months.

4. Mischief causing damage to public property by fire or explosive substance:- Whoever commits an offence under sub- section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 3 by fire or explosive substance shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year, but which may extend to ten years and with fine: Pr

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top