HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.11505 of 2025

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) by the petitioner/accused seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.3721 of 2025 on the file of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad at Nampally, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 115(2) and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNS’) and Section 175(3) of the BNSS.

2. Heard Sri Mir Mukarram Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations made in the complaint do not attract the ingredients of the alleged offences against the petitioner and that the present complaint has been lodged merely to settle a civil dispute between the de-facto complainant and the accused. He further submitted that the third vendor is none other than the mother of the de-facto complainant and that the de-facto complainant's father has passed away. He further submitted that the civil suit filed by the de-facto complainant was dismissed on 14.09.2016, and the appeal preferred against the said judgment was also dismissed. However, a second appeal has been preferred and is presently pending. Therefore, it is contended that the present complaint has been filed only to give a criminal colour to an ongoing civil dispute. Hence, he prayed the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

4. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that prosecution has recorded the statements of independent witnesses and prosecution has nothing to do with pending civil suit and that once allegations point out prime facie case against the petitioner, that the prosecution is entitled to proceed in accordance with due process of law. Therefore, he prayed that the petition be dismissed.

5. Perused the record. It discloses that O.S. No. 614 of 2020 is pending before the Civil Court, wherein the petitioner herein is arrayed as a defendant. Further, O.S. No. 737 of 2022 has been filed by the mother and siblings of the de-facto complainant, seeking a legal heir certificate and a declaration as legal heirs of Mohd. Sarwar, wherein the name of the petitioner herein does not appear. Thus but for the de-facto complainant all his siblings and their mother sought for legal heir certificate. It shows the dispute between the de-facto complainant and his family members. The contents of the present complaint disclose specific allegations against the petitioner and statements of independent witnesses have also been recorded. Both the complaint and the statements of independent witnesses point out specific allegations against the petitioner which need to be tested during the course of trial. Though learned counsel for the petitioner contended that a criminal case cannot be initiated during the pendency of a civil dispute, the Apex Court in Kathyayini v. Sidharth P.S. Reddy, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 712 has held that pendency of civil proceedings on the same subject matter, involving the same parties is no justification to quash the criminal proceedings if a prima facie case exists against the accused persons.

6. Therefore, in light of the aforementioned discussion and relying upon the cited decision, it is deemed appropriate to

dispose of the petition by dispensing with the attendance of the petitioner before the trial Court, unless his presence is specifically required during the course of trial, provided that he shall be represented by his counsel on every date of hearing.

7. Accordingly this Criminal Petition is disposed of.

8. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

____________________________ JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

15.09.2025 gv