Sri.Abdul Mohsin Vs State of Telangana — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2025)

Sri.Abdul Mohsin Vs State of Telangana — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quash declined and proceedings in C.C.No.1374 of 2020 permitted to continue; however, the Magistrate was directed to dispose of the matter expeditiously and the petitioner was exempted from personal attendance before the trial court (unless presence specifically required), subject to representation through counsel on every date of hearing. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the proceedings against the petitioner (Accused No.3), who claims he was merely a Station Supervisor not involved in the business conducted by Accused Nos.1 and 2, should be quashed in C.C.No.1374 of 2020 under Section 528 BNSS. +1 more

Court's answer

The complaint and the statements of witnesses disclose specific allegations against the petitioner and other accused of duping customers and vendors by diverting original articles ordered by customers; therefore it is not appropriate to quash the proceedings against the petitioner at this stage.

Ratio / Principle

Since the C.C. is of the year 2020, the learned Magistrate is directed to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible.

Key takeaways

The petitioner's attendance before the trial court is dispensed with, unless his presence is specifically required during the course of trial, provided that he shall be represented by his counsel on every date of hearing.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Petition under S.528 BNSS by Accused No.3 (allegedly a Station Supervisor) seeking quash of proceedings in C.C.No.1374 of 2020 on the file of the I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jagtial, for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 IPC: HELD, complaint and witness statements disclose specific allegations that the petitioner along with other accused duped customers and vendors by diverting original articles ordered by customers; quashing at this stage not appropriate. Petition disposed of with directions that the Magistrate dispose of the 2020 case expeditiously and that the petitioner's personal attendance stand dispensed with (unless presence specifically required), provided he is represented by counsel on every date of hearing.

[³⁴⁴⁴ ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

MONDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE^{TIRUMALADEVIEADA}

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10995 OF 2025

Between:

Sri.Abdul [r,4ohsin, S/O. Abdul Raheem,^{Aged25 years, Occ. Private Service,} R/O. H .No.5-2-1613, lt/lahbub Pura, Jagtial^{JagtialDistrict.}

Presently residing at Warehouse, NBR.^{7567, 1st Floor Riyadh, Saudi Arabia,} Postal Code.¹ 4325.

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.³

AND

1- State of Telangana, Represented by^{its Public Prosecutor, HighCourt} buildings, Hyderabad

Sri.Tarun Verma, S/o. Vijay Verma, Occ^{. Authorized Representative,R/o} Ground Floor - 264, Jangpura Road,^{New Delhi -1 10014}

...RESPON DENTS/COMPLAINANTS

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS^{prayingthat in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of^{Criminal Petition, the High Cou( maybe} pleased to call for the entire records of the cc^{No.1374 of 2020 on the file ofI} Additional Judicial Magistrate of Frrst^{class Jagtial, Jagtial District} ,^{and Quash the} proceedings

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2025

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS^{prayingthat in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds^{of Criminal Petition, the High Courtmaybe} pleased to grant interim stay of all further^{proceedingsin CC No. 1374 12020 On} the tile of I Additional Judicial Magistrate^{of First Class at Jagtial JagtialDistrict} agarnst the^{petitioner pending disposal of the above Quash proceedings}

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the argume rts of Sri L V Ramana Rao ,Advocate for the Petitioner and sri Jithender Rao Veera malla, the Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Telangana on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2

The Court made the following: ORDER

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

CRIMINAL PETITION No.'l 0995 of 2025

ORDER

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the petitioner/accused No.3 seeking to quash the proceedings against him in C.C.No.1374 of 2020 on the file of I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Jagtial, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 406 and 42O of lpC.

Heard Smt. G.Sampada, learned counsel representing Sri L.V.Ramana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner herein is arrayed as Accused No.3 and that he is not involved in the offences alleged against him. She further submitted that Accused Nos.1 and 2 were conducting the business, whereas Accused No.3, who is a Station Supervisor, is not concerned with the allegations levelled against Accused

2

ETD, J tlrl P 10995 2025

Nos.1 and 2. Therefore. she prayed to^quash th:^proceedings against the petitioner.

On the other hand, Learned Additional Publi,; Prosecutor submitted that all the accused, including the pt:t tioner, were involved in committing fraud by duplicating the articles ordered by customers retaining the original articles and delivr:ring duplicate ones to the customers. As a result, the customerr; would return the duplicate articles to the vendors. Thus, the fraurj came to light and therefore, he prayed to dismiss the petition.

Perused the record. The contents of the conrf,laint and the 16'1 statements of the witnesses clearly indicate specific allegations against the petitioner and other acciL s 3d that they were involved in duping customers as well ar; vendors by divErting the original articles ordered by the custom,:rs. Therefore, it is not appropriate to quash the proceedingr; against the petitioner at this stage. However, since the C.C is of the year 2020, the learned Magistrate is directed to dispose: ,:f the matter as expeditiously as possible. However, the atte rdance of the petitioner is dispensed with before the trial CoL rt, unless his ) prdpence is specifically required during the cc,urse of trial,

3

-T.ry---Ez

lr'l Il, J Crl.P 10995 2025

provided that he shall be represented by his counsel on every date of hearing

With the above said observations, this Criminal Petition is disposed of

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed

SD/- P. PONNA KRISHNA ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

6

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The I Additional Judicial Magistrate of^{First Classat Jdgtial Jagtial District} 2. The Station House Officer, Jagtial^{Twon Police Station, JagtialDistrict} 3 Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor,^{High Court for the State of Telanganaat} Hyderabad IOUT]

4 Ohe CC to SRl. L V Ramana Rao Advocate [OPUC]

Two CD Copies

j

HIGH COURT

DATED:0611012025

ORDER

CRLP.No.10995 ot 2025

.a THIE S rA
/',
;_.
i)1' -) li'
ll i-.>
, -- ll 6 uou 6 ',
ir o-
\t
\ PATcHEO *

CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISPOSED OF

t\ \r<br>