IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.13287 OF 2025 DATE: 07-01-2026 Between:

Shaik Arafath Basha and six others … Petitioners And The State of Telangana, Represented by SHO, Rajendranagar Police Station, Through Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, At Hyderabad and another ... Respondents

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 7 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.912 of 2025 of Rajendranagar Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offences under Sections 85, 316(2) and 351(2) read with 3(5) BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. Heard Sri Vadeendra Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State and Sri Syed Ahmed Ali, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that two crimes are registered based on the same incident, one on the complaint being lodged by the father of respondent No.2-de facto complainant and the other by respondent No.2 herein; and that, therefore, continuation of proceedings against the petitioners would be an abuse of process of law, as it is against the principles laid down by the Honourable Apex Court in T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala & Others¹ and Babu Bhai v. State of Gujarat, (2010) 12 SCC 254. He further submitted that registration of multiple F.I.Rs. based on the same incident cannot be entertained. He further submitted that the over anxiety of the de facto complainant is reflected by getting the multiple cases registered against the petitioners, which discloses the falsity in the complaint. He, therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings in the present crime against the petitioners herein.

4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submitted that the first crime i.e., Crime No.478 of 2024 of Kurnool III-Town Police

(2001) 6 SCC 181

Station, is registered based on the complaint lodged by the father of the respondent No.2-de facto complainant herein on the assault made by the petitioner Nos.1 to 3 against the de facto complainant therein and that the present crime i.e., Crime No.912 of 2025 of Rajendranagar Police Station, Cyberabad, is registered based on the complaint lodged by the de facto complainant with regard to the harassment made by her husband and in-laws. Therefore, both the cases are registered based on different set of allegations and based on two incidents. Hence, the proceedings in the present crime cannot be quashed. He, therefore, prayed to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted to pass appropriate orders in the Criminal Petition.

6. Perused the record.

7. The contents of both the complaints reveal the same set of allegations. Crime No.478 of 2024 of Kurnool III-Town Police Station, Kurnool, is registered for the offences under Sections 85, 118(1), 118(2) and 351(2) read with 3(5) BNS and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, based on the complaint lodged by the father of the de facto complainant herein. In the said crime, investigation is completed, charge sheet is filed and the same was taken cognizance and numbered as C.C.No.157 of 2025 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Prohibition and Excise), Kurnool. In the said crime, it is alleged that the complainant’s daughter (de facto complainant herein) was harassed by her husband and parents-in-law and that on 10.12.2024, they tried to kill his daughter by pressing her throat and that as accused No.1 has hit his daughter with Kadiyam, she sustained bleeding injuries and therefore, they got her admitted in the hospital on 11.12.2024 and on the same day, accused No.1 along with other accused have come down to the hospital, pulled the de facto complainant therein by his collar, driven him to the open place and when accused No.2 caught hold of him, accused No.1(hi