THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI CRIMINAL PETITION No.15507 OF 2024 % Dated:23.09.2025 # Smt. Vanapatla Kavitha, W/o. Jagan Mohan Rao, Aged about 43 years, Occ: Household, R/o. Anupuraram, V/o. Vemulawada Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District .. Petitioner/Accused And The State of Telangana, through S.H.O., Vemulawada Town Police Station, Rajanna Sircilla District, rep., by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad and another .. Respondents ! Counsel for petitioner : Mr. V.V. Ramana Rao ^ Counsel for respondent No.1 : 1. Learned Additional Advocate General

2. Mr. A.P. Suresh Ram, learned counsel.

> HEAD NOTE:

? Cases referred

1. MANU/SC/0003/2024

2. (2019) 16 SCC 739

3. (2021) 3 SCC 751 : 2021 INSC 135

4. 2024 SCC OnLine SC 58 : 2024 INSC 49 THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR JUKANTI CRIMINAL PETITION No.15507 OF 2024

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (for short ‘BNSS’) by petitioner/accused to quash the proceedings in Crime (FIR) No.592 of 2024 on the file of Vemulawada Town Police Station, Rajanna Sircilla District registered for offence under Section 420 of IPC vide FIR dated 05.11.2024.

2. Heard Mr. V.V.Ramana Rao, learned counsel for petitioner/accused, learned Additional Advocate General for respondent No.1-State and Mr. A.P.Suresh Ram, learned counsel appearing independently for the officer, without there being a vakalat. Learned Senior Counsel Avinash Desai is appointed as amicus.

3. This case has a chequered history. This Court is conscious of the fact that a contempt case is pending before this High Court for non-compliance of orders in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 and a Writ Appeal preferred challenging the orders in writ petition as on date.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for petitioner/ accused that house bearing No. 7-13 (H.No.4-37/1), at Anupuram Village, was acquired by Government in 2004, compensation was paid, but her name was not shown in the list of project displaced families. That, she filed W.P.No.31271 of 2016 in the High Court and the High Court by order dated 02-11-2023 held that her family comes under the definition of “Project Displaced Family”. It is further submitted that for non compliance of the order(s) of High Court, she filed a contempt case bearing No.1937 of 2024 (filed on 19.09.2024), pending on the file of the High Court as on date. It is also submitted that a Writ Appeal bearing No.688 of 2024 (filed on 06.06.2024), was preferred against the order in W.P.No.31271 of 2016, no interim orders were granted in the Writ Appeal, which is pending on the file of this Court.

5. It is submitted that, suppressing all these facts, respondent No.2 herein, who’s not a party to the writ petition and the contempt case, on the basis of letters of the office of Collector & RDO, Rajanna Sircilla District, lodged a complaint against the petitioner, on the ground that petitioner misguided the High Court and obtained the order(s). It is further submitted that the High Court, declared the petitioner, “as eligible to receive the benefits under the R&R Policy and petitioner’s family was a separate family as per G.O.Ms.No.68, I & CAD (PW.L.A. IV R & R) Department, dated 08.04.2005, and directed respondents to include name of petitioner in beneficiary list of Project Displaced Families.”

6. It is pointed out that the respondents i.e., Collector and RDO in the writ petition, instead of complying with the directions of the Court, initiated the criminal proceedings by addressing letters to the office of Tahsildar. That, the Tahsildar, Vemulawada, addressed letter No.E/992/2024, dated 05.11.2024 (annexed at page No.8), to the Station House Officer, Police Station Vemulawada, to book a case against petitioner/accused. It is contended that respondent No.2 has lodged the complaint on the instigation of official respondents (Collector and RDO) in W.P.No.31271 of 2016 to withdraw the contempt case and hence, is an abuse of process of la