Allowed

Mohammed Sarfaraz khan v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC7 Oct 2025CRLP/11176/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings against an accused office boy in a cheating case. The court held that merely collecting money from retailers as an instruction from the main accused did not attract the ingredients of cheating under Section 420 IPC.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.4 in C.C. No. 8085 of 2020 at Nampally were quashed. Miscellaneous petitions closed.

Mohammed Sarfaraz khan Vs The State of Telangana — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

TUESDAY. THE SEVENTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 11176 OF 202s

¶6

Between:

¶7

Mohammed Sa rfaraz khan, S/o lvlohammed Fayaz khan Aged about 25 years, Occ. Student. R/o H no.8-99, Narsingi, Puppalaguda, Rangareddy, Hyderabad

¶8

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO. 4

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana Through Public Prosecutor High Courl for the State of Telangana. At Hyderabad.

¶11

B.Janardhan Reddy. s/o Late ts. Malla Recjdy. Aged 41 yrs, Occ. Business. R/o 8-1-363/19, Aditya Nagar Tolrchowkr Beside Varun l\ilotors. Hyderabad, Telangana-500008

¶12

RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS

¶13

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying lhat in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition. the High Court may be pleased to call for the records in C C No 8085 of 2A2A on the file of Honble XII.ADDL Chief Judicial Magistrate at Nampally and quash the same.

¶14

l.A. NO: 1OF 2025

¶15

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Crirninal Petrtion,the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings agatnst the petitioner in C.C N0.8085 of 2020 on the file of Honble XIIADDL Chief Judicral Magistrate at Nampally, pending disposal of the present quash petition.

¶16

l.A. NO: 2OF 2025

¶17

Petitron under Section 528 of BNSS prayrng that in the crrcumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petrtron,the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including execution of NBW sureties of Rs. 20,000/- against the petitioner in C C.No. 8085 of 2020 on the file of Honble Xll. ADDL Chief Judicial lvlagistrate at Nampally, pending disposal of the present quash petition

¶18

Thrs Petition com ng on for hearing, upon perusing the lVemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petitron and upon hearing the argumen:s of Sri Dr J VIPLAV BABU. Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jitendei' Rao ,/.::ra^ralia Learned Addl Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.'l irnd rone appeared for the Respondert No 2

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

¶21

CRIMINAL PETITION No.1 1 176 ot 2025

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.4 in C.C.No,8085 of 2020, on the file of the learned Xll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, registered for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 read with 34 of lPC.

¶24

Heard Dr.J.Viplav Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.4 as well as Sri Jitender Rao Veeramalla, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.

¶25

Though notice was sent to the 2nd respondent to the address mentioned in the charge sheet, the same was returned with an endorsement "Addressee not known" on one occasion and "addressee left" on another occasion. Hence, it is held to be a deemed service.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a studenl and due to his poor economical condition, he used to work as an office boy under accused Nos.1 to 3 and

ara,)

'Qffi=l - -,.:i,-: \

according to their instructions, he used to^supp'hr the^material. Except for that. he is not at all concerned^{with any c:her allegations} in the case He further submitted that the^{petitioner has completed} his Graduation and is^pursuing MBA. Due to^{continuatton of} proceedings against the petitioner, his career is at stake.^He therefore^prayed to^quash the^proceedings against^{tlre petitioner.}

¶31

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted^that the averment against the^petitioner is that accused^{I'lo 4 beingthe} employee of accused Nos.1 to 3, also used to collect^antountsfrom the retailers from time to time regularly. He therefore^{prayed to pass} appropriate orders.

¶32

6 Perused the record. The recitals of charge sh=':t^point out^that accused No.4 was an employee of accused Nos.l^{to 3 and the only} allegation against the^petitioner is that he used to^{c:ollect amounts} fronr the retailers regularly. Except for that,^{there i:; ro allegationin} the charge sheet. Considering the averments^{in trr-'charge sheet} and also the submissions of both the counsel,^{accu;e:dNo.4 is said} to be an office boy under accused Nos.1 to^{3 and t r:rt as part of his} duties entrusted by accused Nos.1 to 3,^{he used .c collectmoney} from the retailers. The said act does not attrac^{the ingredients}

¶33

¶34

ETD,] c..P No.11176 2025

¶35

---v=v

¶36

under Section 420 of IPC and therefore, the continuation of proceedings against the petitioner would be abuse of process of law

¶37

Hence, the Criminal^petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.4 in C C No.g0B5 of 2020, on the file of the learned Xll Additional chief tvretroporitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, are hereby quashed.

¶38

il/iscellaneous petrtions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶39

SD/.M.OSMAN ALI^BAIG ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

i/TRUE COPY//

SECTION OF^FICER

To,

'1 . The XII.ADDL Chief Judicial Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad.

¶44

The Station House Officer,^{C.C.S Police Station, Hyderabad.}

¶45

3 One CC to SRI^{Dr J VIPLAVBABU Advocate} [OPUC]

¶46

Two CCs to THE^{PUBLICPROSECUTOR.High Court for theState of} Telangana Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶47

Two CD Copies

¶48

ARM/PSL

¶49

E-

¶50

I I I I I L I I I i i I I 1 I I I I I I t ! I I I i i I I

{

HIGH COURT

DATED:0711012025

ORDER

CRLF.No.11176 of 2025

¶57

TTiE S14.6.
{ )
25ltuq
<br>t
SPATCreFO *

¶58

ALLOWING THE CRLP

¶59

$l coPqz')
q-
6

Mohammed Sarfaraz khan v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Sarfaraz khan 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B. Ananthamma Vs The State of Telangana

Malothu Ravinder Vs The State of Telangana through S.H.O. P.S. Mahabubabad, Mahabubabad District

Sri.Abdul Mohsin Vs State of Telangana

Y. Radha Vs The State of Telangana

Devara Muralikrishna, Vs State of Telangana

Chowtapalli Duggi Raj Kiran, Vs The State of Telangana