IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.8867 of 2025 DATE: 23.03.2026 BETWEEN:

Nalamada Uthamkumar Reddy …..petitioner/accused No.1 And The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad and another.

…..Respondent/complainant

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.1 in C.C.No.400 of 2023 on the file of the learned Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Excise Cases, Hyderabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 188 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 18.10.2019 at about 22:00 hours, the complainant M. Nagendar, Inspector of Survey and District Survey Officer, Suryapet, who was then working as MCC–II officer for the Huzurnagar by-election, lodged a complaint stating that on 18.10.2019 at about 20:00 hours a road show was organized at Mattampally village and mandal by leaders of the INC party, including Sri Uttam Kumar Reddy and Sri Revanth Reddy, in support of the party’s candidate Smt. Padmavathi. During the road show, the leaders addressed the gathering from an open-top vehicle and a large number of supporters and public assembled on the main road, resulting in obstruction of traffic on the Mattampally main road for some time, causing inconvenience to the general public. Basing on the same, the case was registered for the above said offences.

3. Heard Sri Baglekar Akash Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri M. Ramachander Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent - State and Sri Kuppala Ujwal Babu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed as the mandatory requirement under Section 195(1)(a) Cr.P.C. has not been complied with, since the alleged offence under Section 188 IPC can be taken cognizance of only on a complaint filed before the Magistrate by the concerned public servant, whereas in the present case the proceedings were initiated on the basis of a police report. He further submitted that even if the allegations are taken at their face value, no offence is made out against the petitioner and that the proceedings are legally barred. He contended that the case falls within the parameters laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal1, and reliance is placed on the decision of this Court in Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy v. State of Telangana, 2023 SCC Online TS 4090, wherein similar proceedings were quashed for non-compliance with Section 195(1)(a) Cr.P.C. Therefore, he prayed the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioner by allowing this Criminal Petition.

1 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for respondent No.2, respectively, submitted that the allegations in the complaint disclose that the petitioner and others conducted a political meeting and campaign in a religious place during the Huzurnagar Assembly Bye-Elections, thereby violating the election rules and the Model Code of Conduct. They further submitted that the investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has been filed based on the material collected during the course of investigation. They further contended that the issues raised by the petitioner are matters to be decided during trial and not at the stage of quashing proceedings. Therefore, they prayed the Court to dismiss the Criminal Petition.

6. In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on record, it appears that the petitioner was charged for the offences punishable under Sections 341 and 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. It is specifically contended by the learned counsel