IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA Date:22.01.2026 Between:

Rohit Mawle and another …Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2 And State of Telangana, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad and 2 others.

... Respondents

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 in FIR No.166 of 2024 on the file of Economic Offences Wing Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, registered for the offences under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) and 61(2) of BNS.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners-accused have fraudulently induced the de facto complainant to make investments of more than Rs.4.00 crores in their business, with a promise to pay high returns but failed to repay the same.

3. Heard Sri C. Raghu, learned Senior Counsel representing M/s. Harsheet Reddy Law Firm, learned counsel on record for the petitioners, Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri Md. Abdul Mateen Qureshi, learned counsel for the respondent No.3.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are facing false allegations and that they have not committed any such acts of forgery or cheating as alleged by the de facto complainant and that they have not committed any economic offence. He further submitted that the accounts of the petitioners herein are freezed for no reason, due to which the petitioners are suffering a lot and that without any specific allegations against the petitioners and without any material being collected by the Investigating Agency, continuing the investigation against the petitioners and freezing their accounts is not justified and therefore, he prayed to defreeze the accounts of the petitioners and to quash the proceedings against them.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the petitioners herein are accused Nos.1 and 2 in the present crime, who have committed serious economic offence and that the earlier quash petition filed by the petitioners was disposed of with a direction to cooperate with the Investigating Agency and that the accused shall be present before the Investigating Officer as and when their presence is required. He further submitted that the petitioners have obtained anticipatory bail which was further cancelled on an application by the victim, and that they have never obliged the orders and that when they are facing serious allegations of economic offence, no relief can be granted against the petitioners herein. He further submitted that the writ petition filed by the petitioners is pending vide WP No.37149 of 2024 and that they have also filed stay petition, which was not granted and now again they are seeking to quash the proceedings and hence, he prayed to dismiss the petition. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has relied upon the decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsnhbhai Karmur and others v. State of Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 SCC 641

6. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3 has submitted that the petitioners are not entitled to any relief as they have been filing one petition or the other to stall the investigation. He further submitted that they have committed serious economic offence and are not at all entitled to quashment of the proceedings and that they

have lured the innocent victims, collected huge amounts promising them to high returns and have defrauded the victims to a tune of more than 60.00 crores and therefore, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

7. Perused the record.

8. A perusal of the record discloses that the de facto complainant is a self employed Stock Market Trader and on developing acquaintance with him, the petitioner No.1 herein – A1 has asked for an investment in his business promising to give high returns in a short term and requested for mone