Disposed

Smt. Sadia Sultana and 3 others v. Sri Mohd. Hafeezuddin and another

Telangana HC12 Nov 2021CRLP/8000/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court, while rejecting the plea to quash criminal proceedings against female petitioners, directed the Investigating Officer not to take coercive steps or arrest them during the investigation into offences under IPC 309 and others.

What did the court decide?

Directs Investigating Officer not to take coercive steps or arrest petitioners during investigation; they must cooperate with IO.

Smt. Sadia Sultana and 3 others Vs Sri Mohd… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FRIDAY ,THE TWELFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DT. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 8000 OF 2021

¶6

Between:

¶7

Smt. Sadia Sultana and 3 others, W/o. Mahmood Moihuddin, aged about 49 years, Occ Housewife, Ryo. 8-2-684/3, Plot No- 60, Banjara Green Colony, Road No. 12, Banjara Hills, Khairatabad, Hyderabad, Telangana-500034 (A-2)

¶8

Smt. Ayesha Sultana, W/o. Mohd Faraz, aged about 25 years, Occ Housewife, Fyo.10-3-193/11/1 9, humayannagar, Asifnagar, Humayunagar, Hyderabad. (A-3)

¶9

Miss Javeeriya Sultana, D/o. Mahmood Moihuddin aged about 20 years, Occ Student, Fyo. 3511N32, adams colony, tolichowki, shaikpet, Golkonda, Hyderabad, Telangana. (A4)

¶10

Smt. Uzma Sultana, D/o. Mahmood Mohiuddin Aged about 19 years, Occ Student Fyo. H. No. 443-424-lll, Shaya Castia, Road No.86, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad.(A5)

¶11

...PETITION ERD/ACCUSED

¶12

ANO

¶13

Sri Mohd. Hafeezuddin and another, Occ Detective lnspector of Police, Banjara Hills P.S., Hyderabad O/o. Banjara Hills Police Station, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad

¶14

The State of Telangana, rep., by Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana. At Hyderabad.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS

¶16

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petilion, the High Court may be^pleased to^quash all further proceedings in Crime No. 722 of 2021 of Banjara Hills Police Station, Hyderabad, Hyderabad, in the interest of^justice.

¶17

l.A. NO: 2 OF 202'l

¶18

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances' stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be^pleased to stay all further proceedings including arresl of the petltioners in Crime No. 722 of 2021 ol Batlan Hills Police Station, Hyderabad^ponding disposal of the above Criminal^petition and^pass

¶19

This Petition coming on for hearing,upon^perusing the^Memorandum of^{Groundsof Criminal} Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri T S ANIRUDH REDDY ,Advocate for the^Petitioner and the Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of for the Respondent^No.2 not appearing either in^person or by advocate.

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

¶22

THE HON'BLE DT. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHERCRI MINAL ETITI N No. 0O of o2t^.

¶23

A.E=DIB

¶24

This Criminal^petition, under Section 4BZ of the CorJe of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short,Cr.p.C.,), is filed by the petitioners/A.2 to A.5, seeking to quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.722 of 2O2L of Banjara Hills police Station, Hyderabad, registered for the ofFences punishable under sections 332,353,504, 506, 309, 109 r/w 34 of IpC.

¶25

Heard the learned counsel for petitioners /A.2 to A.5, learned Assistant Public^prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.2/State and perused the reco rd.

¶26

It has been contended on behalf of the petitioners/A.2 to A.5 that comprainant and his staff, without discrosing their identity, created nuisance at the house of the petitioners/A.2 to A.5. The petitioners/A.2 to A.5 were not involved in any criminal activity prior to registration of the subject crime. Ail the petitioners/A.2 to A.5 are women. All the allegations made in the subject report, dated 06.10.2021 are absolutely false. Though it is alleged that the petitioners/A'2 to A.5 have threatened to commit suicide, but there is no description or details of the petitioner/accused, who made such an attempt. Further, the copies of medical report available reflect that they were generated subsequent to the registration of the subject FIR. Further, it was mentioned in the said medicar report that the injuries were caused by unknown persons and ultrmately prayed to allow the Criminal petition as prayed for.

¶27

¶28

4.ontheotherhand,thelearnedAssistantPublicProsecutor appearing for^{respondent No.2/Stateopposed the relief soughtby} the^{petitionerslA.2lo A'5 and contendedthat the allegationsin the} subject FIR^{constitute cognizable offences, which require} investigation and ultimately^{prayed to dismissthe Criminal Petition.}

¶29

5,Here,itispertinenttostatethattheinherentjurisdictionof theHighCourtunderSection4B2ofCr.P.C.canbeexercisedto quash proceedings in a^{proper case, either to prevent the abuse of} the process of any^{courtor otherwiseto secure the ends of justlce'} In the instant^{case, none of the circumstancesmentioned above do} exist for^{quashlngthe proceedingsagainstthe petitioners/A'2to} A.5inthesubjectcasebyexercisingtheinherentjurisdictionofthis Court under^{Section 482 of Cr.P.C.}

¶30

The truth or^{otherwiseof the allegations made againstthe} petitioners/A.2 to A.5^{is requiredto be establishedin the course of} investigation, as^{per the procedureestablished underlaw The} material^{placedon record disclosesthat the petitioner/A'2 is an} aged woman.^{The petitioners/A.4 and A'5 are students' Further'} the contention^{bf the petitioners/A 2 to A 5 that they werenot} involved in any^{crime prior to registration of the subject FIR has not} beendisputedbythelearnedAssistantPublicProsecutor'l'4oreover' allthepetitioners/A.2toA.5areladies.Keepinginviewthetotality of circumstances,^{the Investigating Officer/Station House Officer'} Banjara Hills^{PoliceStation,Hyderabad,is directed not to take any} coercive steps,^{including arrest, against the petitioners/A'2to A'5'} However, the^{investigation may} 90^{on' The petitioners/A'2to A'5}

¶31

-1

¶32

shall cooperate with the Investigating Officer^{for smooth conductof} in vestig atio n .

¶33

With the above observation s/d irectio n, this^{Criminal Petition} is disposed of.

¶34

Miscellaneous Petitions, if any,^pending in this^Criminal

¶35

Petition shall stand closed.

¶36

I/ThUE^COPY//

¶37

SDI-L.LAKSHMI^BABU ASSISTAN,IEGISTRAR \3'

¶38

SECTION^OFFICER

¶39

To,

¶40

The^{lll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate' Hyderabad'}

¶41

The Station^{House Officer, Police Station BaniaraHills' Hyderabad'}

¶42

One^{CC to SRl. T S ANIRUDH REDDY Advocate IOPUCI}

¶43

Two^{CCs to the Public Prosecutor' High Court for the State of Telangana' at Hyderabad [OUT]}

¶44

Two^{CD Copies} 6. One^SPareCoPY

HIGH COURT

DATED:1211112021

ORDER

CRLP.No.8000 of 2021

1 tlE srA !
(
o 19 NWzofl
.:
t:

¶50

DISPOSING OF CRLP

¶51

¶52

Smt. Sadia Sultana and 3 others v. Sri Mohd. Hafeezuddin and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sadia Sultana and 3 others v. Sri Mohd. Hafeezuddin and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rohith Thumma and Another Vs The State of Telangana and Another

Smt. Dasu Chandravathi, Vs The Station House Officer

Smt. I.Ramadevi Vs Sunil Bajaj

Ammarajula Rajeswar Vs The State of Telangana

B. Balraj Goud Vs The State of Telangana and another

Teggula Vikram Goud, Vs The State of Telangana