Allowed

N Mohan v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC21 Mar 2023CRLP/9310/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allowed Criminal Petitions under Section 482 CrPC filed by accused persons A-20, A-22, and A-26. The High Court quashed the proceedings in C.C. No. 1598 of 2018, relying on a prior criminal revision where the court found no prima facie case due to general allegations and lack of specific overt acts against the accused. The Court also noted statutory restrictions under Section 186 IPC

What did the court decide?

The proceedings pending against the petitioners in C.C. No. 1598 of 2018 on the file of IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, stand quashed.

N Mohan Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32sl I

¶2

IN THE HIGH^{COURT FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

TUESDAY,^{THE TWENW FIRST DAY OF MARCH} ' --rwo inousAND AND TwENw rHREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER}

¶6

CRIMIN^{AL PETITION Nos:9310. 9730and9729 ol 2021}

¶7

Crl o.No.93^{'tO ot 2O21}

¶8

Between:

¶9

N Mohan. S/o^{Krishna,Age- 26 years' Occ-M-Sc.Botany^StudentR/o Maneru} 'il#i""i'iil6 FLi o'rb-,r & ri'' no i, wiⁿ a^{p"'thi ( Ma nd al a ndDi st)'}

¶10

...Petitioner/Accused^No'20

¶11

AND

¶12

The State^{of Telangana'rep by its Public-Prosecutor'Hioh Court for the State} of relansana,^{a*rvoeild55' iil;;iii;;'s'bsmania iJniiersitv'Hvderabad'}

¶13

. ' -ResPondent

¶14

S.H.O,^{O-U. Police Station' Osmania UniversityCampus' Besides Arts} ' 6iri""g"lolma niiu n"rsiiv' Hvd erabad -⁵⁰⁰⁰⁰⁷

¶15

...RespondenUDe'facto^Complainant

¶16

Osmania^{University,Repby its Registrar Hyderabad - 500007}

¶17

Petition^{under Section482 of Cr 'P 'C Oraylngthat in the circumstances} statedintheMemorand,..n"otc.,no'ofCriminil-Petition,theHighCourtmaybe^{pleased to quash tn" p'o""eio"''ti-s;i" C c} Y 1 ?98 of 2018'^{on the file of the} 'cniJr,rlEtr"politan Magistrate, Hyderabad registered court of the^{tV Additionr,} under Sec.143 ,147,14a,^{aiz'-ra6'ss3'120- B read with 149 of IPC and under} section 7^{(1) (a) of ft't ciil"-i"'illiJlt*orn"ntAct' 1932' in the interest of} justice

¶18

t.A. NO:^{2 oF 2021}

¶19

PetitionunderSection482ofCr.P.Cprayingthatinthecircumstances statedintheMemorand,,.'ore.,no'ofCriminilPetition,theHighCourtmayi5'i[]i"i',i-stav^{all t"t]."i pt""LJinss includins the appearance of the}

¶20

/ Petitioner/Accused^{No. 20 in C'C' No' 1598 of 2018 daled-16t1112018 on the file} of the lV Additional^{Cfrief lrrieiropoliGnMagistrateat Hyderabad till the disposal} of tne Utain Quash^{Petition in the interest of justice}

¶21

This Petition^{comingon for hearing, upon perusingthe Memorandumof} Grounds of^{Criminal Petitlnand upon hearingthe argumentsof Sri RAMESH} CHILLA, Advocate^{for the Petitionerand the Additional Public Prosecutor on} behalf of the^{Respondent No.1and None Appeared for the Respondent No 2 & 3}

¶22

Crl o.No.9730^of2021

¶23

Between:

¶24

M,?Lll'iilff"i'ft^{,Sffi 3i',1%ii"i#,lf '-:::"Sii,:ft""T'Rly'$ifl "ll#;} District.

¶25

...Petitioner/Accused^No'22

¶26

AND

¶27

The State^{of Telangana, rep' by its Public Prosecutor'Hioh Court for the State} of Telangana,^{atrrvoeildI5, it&;iP S osmaniaUniiersitv' Hvderabad'}

¶28

...ResPondent

¶29

S.H.O,^{O.U. PoliceStation' Osmania Universily^^C-ampus'Besides Arts} - 6liri"g'", Olmania Universitv' Hvderabad - 500007

¶30

...RespondenUDe-facto^Complainant

¶31

Petition under^{section482 of cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances} StatedintheMemorandur,'ofG'ounosofCriminalPetition,theHighCourtmay ;;;;;; t^q;ash the^{pto-"""oing"in C'C No 15e8 of 2018' on the file of the} court of lV Additional^{chiei-l,,,GtropolitanMagistrate, Hyderabad registered under} s"".i+s, 14i,148,342,^{1s6: t"'120-Brea-d ylt!} J4s^{of 1PC and undersection} 7il i"l "t tt'"^{Criminal Law AmendmentAct' 1932' in the interest of justice}

¶32

l.A. NO: 1 oF²⁰²¹

¶33

Petition under^{section 482 of cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances} stated in ihe^{Memorandum of Groundsof Criminal Petition' the High Court may} be^{pleasedto dispense *itn t u filing of the original certified copy of charge} sheet in c.c. No.^{15980f zota oat"oiot11120180n the file of the lV Additional} Ctri"i nll"tiopofitan^{Magistrate at Hyderabad before this Hon'ble Court}

¶34

l.A. NO: 2 OF²⁰²¹

¶35

PetitionunderSection482ofCr'P.Cprayingthatinthecircumstances stateo'iriirre^{r.aemorandum of Grounds of criminalpetition, the High courtmay} all further^{proceedins including the appearanceof the} #;";;Ji;-;i;v

¶36

¶37

Petitioner/Accused22inC.C.No.1598of2o18dated16tl112018onthefileof the lV Additional^{Chief rur"i.polit'nrtaagistrateat Hyderabad till the disposalof} the Main Quash^{Petition in the interestof justice}

¶38

This Petition^{corningon for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandumof} Grounds of^{Criminal PetitLnand upon hearingthe argumentsof Sri RAMESH} cHlLLA,AdvocateforthePetitionerandtheAdditionalPublicProsecutoron behalf of the^{Respondent No.1and None Appeared for the Respondent No'2}

¶39

Grlp.No.97^{29 of 2O2!}

¶40

Between:

¶41

il'HI Mutouri Anandam, Ui;;-'Hb;i"]^{Sio chandraiah, i'ffi";i ii;'' a-60' Age. 31 -N'tr"t' years,.occ.M Naskal Mandal' A History RangareddvstudentRl/o} District.

¶42

...Petitioner/Accused^No.26

¶43

AND

¶44

l.ThestateofTelangana,rep.byitsPublicProsecutor.HiohCourtfortheStateof Telansana,^{at Hv#;d;5: iil;sh P'S osmania Uniiersitv'Hvderabad'}

¶45

...ResPondent

¶46

2.S.H.o,o.U.PoliceStation,osmaniaUniversity^Campus,BesidesArts - 6iirLg'", Olminia Universitv' Hvderabad - 500007

¶47

...RespondenuDe-facto^Complainant

¶48

Petition under^{section482 of cr.P.C praying that in the} .circumstances stateo in^{ine Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition,the High court may} ;;;l;;;"; i" tuash^{the er.o"""oinstin c C No'15e8of 2018' on the file of the} 'cni"J-rtl6tropolitan Magistrate, Hyderab-ad registered court of the^{lV Addition"r} under Sec.143,147,148,^{sJ2,-reo,353' 120-B read with149 of IPC and under} section 7^{(1) (a) of the CAminat Law AmendmentAct' 1932'in the interest of} lustice

¶49

LA. NO:^{10F 2021}

¶50

Petition under^{section482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances} stated i;ihe^{Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition' the High Court-may} bepleasedtodispense*itn-tn.filingoftheoriSrinalcertifiedcopyofthe Chargesheet^{in C.C. No. iSSS ot 2018 dated. 16t1it2}18 on the file of the lV} AdditionalChiefMetropolrtanMagistrateatHyderabadbeforethisHon'bleCourt

¶51

/i/

¶52

l.A. NO: 2OF 2021

¶53

Petition under section 482 ot 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 the appeaiance of the Petitioner/Accused No. 26 in c.c. No. '1598 of 2018 dated. 16/1 1/2018 on the file of the lV Additional chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad tiil the disposal of the Main Quash Petition in the interest of justice

¶54

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri RAMESH cH|LLA, Advocate for the Petitioner and the public prosecutor (TG/Ap) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and None Appeared for the Respondent No_2

¶55

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶56

i l i t i I

¶57

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^K.SURENDER

¶58

Crl.P.Nos. 31O.9730 and972 oF 202L

¶59

COMMO ORDER:

¶60

The petitioners in Crl.P.No.9310 of 2021 is^A-20, Crl.P.No.9730 of 202L is A-22,^{and Crl.P.No.9729 of 2021is 4-26} are flled the criminal^{petitions under Section 482 of the Code of} Criminal Procedure, L973^{(for short 'Cr.P.C.) to quash the} proceedings against them in C.C.No.1598 of 2018^pending on^the file of IV Additional Chief^{Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad,} which is^pending trial for the offences^{punishableunderSections} 143, L47, 148,342, 186, 353, 120-8^{read with Section149 of IPC} and under Section 7(1Xa) of^{the Criminal Law Amendment Act,} L932.

¶61

Heard learned counsel for the^{petitioners/A-20,A-22 and} A-26 and learned Additional Public^{Prosecutorfor the respondent} - State. Perused the record.

¶62

Earlier A-15 aggrieved by the^{orders of the trial Court} refusing to discharge him,^{in C.C.No.1598 of 2018 preferred}

¶63

¶64

Cr1.R.C.No.22212020. The said criminal revision filed by A-15^was allowed.

¶65

The relevant^para "In view of the legal position, as enunciated above, it has to fu seen whether the F.I.R. and the documenE accompanying the final report under Section 173 of Cr.P.C. including the sbtemenb recorded by the^prosecution under Srtion 161 of Cr.P.C., disclose the commission of any offence against the petitioner. In the instant case, the^police during^the investigation examined as many as fourteen witnesses and out of them L.Ws.l to 6 are^police officials. Admittedly the accusation^is against mob of studenE. A^perusal of the statements of^the witnesses would disclose that one B.Murali, student of M.Sc.(Physics), who was staying in Room No.159,^{ManeruHostel,} OIJ Camps, has committd suicide on 03.12.2017 in^common bathroom of the hostel building and when the^{local police went} there for enquiry, some of the sfudents^gathered and^{protested in} various manners and^prevented the^police from reaching the dead body and also rioted in ffie hofiel and^they also^startedstone pelting and dropping iron rods, chairs and cots from the terrace. L.Ws.l to 6, who were^present at the^place of occurrence, have

¶66

¶67

I I i

¶68

l i rl I I I I t i I I

¶69

categorically stated^{in their 161 Cr.P.C. statements thatsomeof the} named studen9 and several^{others have obstructed the public} seruants while discharging their^{legitimate duties, by wrongfully} confining and assaulted on the^{police.There is no material to} substantiate that the^{petitioner had assaultedthe policeby pushing} them with fist blows and also obstructed^{them.Thereare no} specific oveft acts against the^{petitioner and the allegation is} general and omnibus. Therefore, without there being^anyevidence about the sprcific overt act^{against the petitioner towardsthe} occurrence, his mere^presence at^{the placeof occurrence is not} enough to fasten him with any^{criminal liability.On considering the} material on record, this Court^is of the^{view that no primafPcie} case is made out against the^petitioner."

¶70

The findings of this Court in criminal^{revision casehas not} been appealed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.^{Further,these} petitioners stand on the same footing as A-15 and the findings in Crl.R.C., are applicable to these^{petitionersfor which reasons, this} Court deems it appropriate to^quash all further^proceedings against these petitioners.

¶71

¶72

¶73

Further, to^prosecute for the offence^{punishable under} Section 186 of IPC the concerned^{public servant has to file a} complaint and charge sheet cannot be filed.^{There is a prohibition} under Section 195^(1)(a) of Cr.P.C., for^{taking cognizance of the} offence^punishable under Section¹⁸⁶ of^{IPC, unless it is filedby} concerned public servant by way of complaint^{beforethe concerned} Court.

¶74

For the above said reason also, apart^{from the findingsin} Crl.R.C.No.222 of 2020 the^{petiUoners succeed'Accordingly,the} proceedings are quashed against^petiUoners in CC^{No.1598of 2018} on the file of IV Additional^{ChiefMetropolitan Magistrate at}

¶75

Hyderabad. All the three criminal^{petitions are allowed.}

¶76

Miscellaneous applications^{pending, if any, shall standclosed.}

¶77

Sd/- K. AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

,f,

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The lV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad

¶82

Z T_he Station House Officer, Police Station, Osmania University Campus, Hyderabad.

¶83

3 Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.(OUT)

¶84

4 One CC to SRl. RAMESH CHILLA, Advocate tOpUCl 5 Two CD Copies

¶85

kam ..<

i l l i t I I I I

HIGH COURT

KS,J

DATED:21 10312023

+
!l ,<br>x
2 0 APn 2il23
,t
a-,

¶91

COMMON ORDER

¶92

CRLP.Nos.9310, 9730 and 9729 of 2021

¶93

ALL THE CRIMINAL PETITIONS ARE ALLOWED

¶94

ft ')b

N Mohan v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N Mohan v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Janga Raghava Reddy Vs Thangellapally Sammaiah and Another

Sreenidhi Townships Private Limited Vs The State of Telangana and Another

G Surendar , Surender Amba Das Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Ibrahim Ali Vs The State of Telangana

Vuppala Pawan Kumar Vs The State of Telangana And Another

Mohd Abdul Rawoof , Mohammed Abdul Rauf, And 3 Others Vs The State of Telangana, And Another