THE HONOURABLE Smt.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11230 of 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.2 seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.437 of 2025 on the file of the Karimnagar I-Town Police Station, Karimnagar District, for the offences under Sections 61, 338, 318(4), 336(3), 340, 329(3), 351(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’).

2. Heard Sri Vadlakonda Ravi Kumar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jithender Reddy Veeramalla, learned counsel for the respondent No.1-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner himself is in possession of the property and that he has an injunction order in his favour. The CMA filed by the de facto complainant was dismissed and that the petitioner is facing false allegations of trespass and forgery and he cannot be alleged to have trespassed into his own land. He further contended that since the allegation of forgery does not attract against the petitioner and all the other offences attract punishment of less than 7 years of imprisonment and hence, the police concerned may be directed to invoke the proceedings under Section 35(3) of BNSS.

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the de facto complainant has purchased the land earlier, but however, the accused herein has caused double registration of the same land by misleading the registration authorities and hence, prayed to dismiss the petition.

5. Perused the record.

6. The record discloses that the petitioner herein along with the other accused have shown a copy of the proceedings supposed to have been issued by the Collector of Karimnagar vide HC No.A5/8356/93 dated 08.07.1994 and has mislead the de facto complainant and the registration authorities. Though the land was already sold by one Nuguri Rajeshwar Rao and Nuguri Sharada, the petitioner herein has got executed GPA in his favour and pursuant to the said GPA, it was transferred to one Konduri Padma. Hence, the allegations under Sections 61, 338, 318(4), 336(3), 340, 329(3), 351(2) read with 3(5) BNS prima facie point out against the petitioner. The contents of the complaint point out serious allegations of forgery and usage of forged documents. The offence under Section 338 of BNS attracts imprisonment of more than 7 years and hence, the proceedings under Section 35(3) of BNSS cannot be invoked.

7. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the allegations under Section 338 BNS does not get attracted and that the petitioner is falsely implicated in the said offence, the veracity of the allegations is yet to be investigated. The investigation is under progress. Hence, it is not proper to quash the proceedings at this initial stage and the petition lack merits and therefore, the same is liable to be dismissed.

8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.

____________________________ JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA October 17, 2025 KTL