: COMMON ORDER :

These Criminal Petitions have been filed by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 respectively seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR No.482 of 2026 of Kukatpally Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, for the offences punishable under Sections 69 and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘the BNS’) and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(1)(r) of the SCs/STs (POA) Act, 1989 (for short ‘the Act’). Hence, both the cases are clubbed together and disposed by way of this common order.

2. Brief facts of the case:

On 01.04.2026 at about 20:15 hours, respondent No.2 lodged the complaint she is a woman constable of the 2020 batch, who had reported for duty at Kukatpally Police Station on 30.12.2020 and was assigned to work as a writer under accused No.1, the then Sub-Inspector of Police, Kukatpally. During her duty, accused No.1 used to contact her personally through frequent calls and messages and, despite her disinterest, followed her and tracked her movements. In 2022, during bandobust duty at Chittaramma Temple, Kukatpally, accused No.1 allegedly took her inside the temple, applied vermilion on her forehead and told that their marriage was completed and forcibly kissed her in public, and thereafter subjected her to continuous physical and mental harassment, compelling her into a relationship through threats and emotional pressure. To avoid his harassment she went on earned leave for two months and despite his transfer in February 2023, he continued to visit her residence and harassed her. On 30.11.2023, after election duty, he allegedly traced her at her colleague’s residence and forcibly had physical relation with her on the promise of marriage, resulting in pregnancy, and repeatedly compelled her to undergo abortions. He continued such conduct, harassing her through calls, video calls, and other means, and caused to behave as a psycho and physically intimidate her and in September 2025 he stated that he will marry her and sort out his troubles and made her to consume pills for abortion. Subsequently, he refused to marry her citing caste differences and social reasons. The complainant later came to know through accused No.2, who is the wife of accused No.1, that he was already married and having children. She further stated that accused No.2 made a phone call, quarreled with her and abused her and her family members in the name of their caste. The complainant claims to possess supporting recordings, messages, and medical records. Therefore, she requested to take necessary action against accused Nos.1 and 2. Basing upon the above said complaint, Crime No.482 of 2026 was registered.

3. Heard Mr. L.Harish, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Madiraju Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel, representing Mr. Rama Rao Kilaru, learned counsel for respondent No.2/de-facto complainant/victim and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State.

4. Submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners:

4.1 Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed the alleged offences and they were falsely implicated in this crime. Even according to the allegations made in the complaint, the ingredients of the offences under Sections 69 and 352 of the BNS and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(1)(r) of the Act are not attracted against accused No.1 and offences under Section 352 of the BNS and Sections 3(2)(v) and 3(1)(r) of the Act are not attracted even against accused No.2. Respondent No.2 implicated the petitioner in Crl.P. No.5733 of 2025 as accused No.2 only on the ground that she is the wife of accused No.1 and there are no allegations, much less specific allegations, levelled against her. The only allegation levelled in the complaint is that accused No.2 abused respondent No.2 over the phone in the name of her caste. He further submitted that no specific allegation has been made against accused No.2 that she used any particular caste related words. Further, t