Disposed

E.Prameela @ Eraku Prameela, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC6 Nov 2025CRLP/13347/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Three quash petitions sought to annul FIRs alleging multiple FIRs on one incident amounted to double jeopardy. The court found the FIRs related to three distinct incidents on different dates, declined to quash at the investigation stage, and directed compliance with Section 35(3) BNSS and Arnesh Kumar guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Petitions disposed: petitioners to appear before IO by 27.11.2025, 11 AM-5 PM; IO to follow Section 35(3) BNSS and Arnesh Kumar guidelines.

E.Prameela @ Eraku Prameela, Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

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

¶2

AT HYDERBAD

¶3

THURSDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF NOVET,4BER

¶4

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI^EADA CRIMINAL PETITION NOs: 13347 13348 and 13349 OF 2025

¶7

cRL.P.13347/2025

¶8

Between:

¶9

1 E Prameela @ Eraku Prameela , D/o. E Bagaiah, Aged^{about 48 years,Occ.} Govt., Employee, R/o H No 2-20-3011 , New Ramnagar Colony^Chilkanagar, Uppal, Hyderabad-500 039, Telangana

¶10

Yilay a Laxmi @ Eda Vijaya Lakshmi,, W/o^{E Venkateshwara Rao,Aged} about.50 years, Occ. Household, R/o^{H.No.2-20-30i1} ,^NewRamnagar Colony, Chilkanagar, Uppal,^{Hyderabad-500039, Telangana.}

¶11

E. Laxmi @ Vulam Laxmamma,, W/o. V.Yellappa,^{Agedabout. 47 yeas lcc.} Agnculture, R/o. H.No 2-20-2811, New^{RamnagarColony, Chilkanagar,Uppal,} Hyderabad-500 039, Telangana.

¶12

E Devendhar @ Eda Devender Goud,,^{S/o. E.VenkateshwaraRao, Aged} about.30 years, Occ. Business,^{Rio. H No.3-100i 1/T,Snnagar Colony,} Bodduppal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District-sOO 092,^Telangana

¶13

...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED^NOs.1 to⁴

¶14

AND

¶15

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

¶16

2 Jakkula Yadagiri,, S/o Late^Ramulu, Aged^{about 50 yrs, Occ Auto Driver, R/o} H No- 2-20- 30/1/8, new Ram^{Nagar Colony,Chilkanagar,Uppal, Hyderabad-} 500 039, Telangana.

¶17

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶18

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS^{praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds^{of Criminal Petition,the High Court may} be pleased to^quash the^{proceedingsagainst the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4} rn Cr.N0.1176 ot 2025 of Uppal Police^{station, Medchal-Malkajgiri Diskict.}

¶19

l.A. NO: 2OF 2025

¶20

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that r the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petitio r the ']igh Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings includir 1 the arrest of the Petitio ne rs/Accu s ed Nos.1 to 4 in Cr.No.1176 ot 2025 of I ppal Police station Medchal-l,4alka1grrr District, pending disposal of the above cr- rsh oetition c RL. P.13348/2025

¶21

Between:

¶22

1 Vi.laya Laxmr @ Eda Vijaya Lakshmi,, Wo. E Venk I -.shwara^{Rao Aged} about.50 years, Occ. Household, Rio. H.No.2-20,1( 'i.^{New Ramnagar} Colony, Chilkanagar, Uppal, Hyderabad-500 039, Telang lna.

¶23

2 E. Laxmi @ VulamLaxmamma,, Wo. V.Yellappa, AgeC bout. 47 years, Occ Agriculture, R/o H.No 2-20-2811. New Ramnagar Color| .Chilkanagar Uppal. Hyderabad-500 039. Telangana

¶24

3 E.Devendhar @ Eda Devender Gaud,, S/o, E.Venl<irl :shwara Rao Aged about.30 years, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.3-100/1/Srinagar Colony Bodduppal, Ivledcha,-t\4alkajgiri District500 092, Telangrr a. ...PETITIONERSi/\ )CUSED NOs 1 to 3

¶25

AND

¶26

The State of Telangana, rep by its Public Prosecutor, H c r Court for the State of Telangana At Hyderabad.

¶27

2 JakkulaYad agiri, Sio Late Ramulu, Aged about. 50 y s Occ.Auto Driver, R/o.H No. 2-20- 3011/8, new Ram Nagar Colony, )hilkanagar. Uppal, Hyderabad-500 039, Telangana

¶28

...RESPONDE NT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that ir the circumstances stated in the l\4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, tl-€ High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the Petitionersrl ccused Nos.1 to 3 in Cr. No.'1 129 of 2025 of Uppal Police station, Medchal-Malka19 rr District . l.A. NO: 2OF 2025

¶29

Petrtion under Section 528 of BNSS praylng that in the :^-cumstances stated in the lt4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the I igh Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings including 1 )e arrest of the

¶30

Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 in Cr.No.1129 of 2025 of Uppal^{Policestation,} Mledchal-MalkaJgiri District.

¶31

c RL. P.1 3349/2025

¶32

Between

¶33

Erukala Prameela @ Eraku Prameela, D/o. E.Bagaiah, Aged^{about 48 years,} Occ Govt. Employee, R/o. H.No.2-20-3011 , New Ramnagar^Colony, Chrlkanagar Uppal, Hyderabad-500 039,^Telangana.

¶34

2 E V\aya Laxmi @ Eda Vi1aya Lakshmi, Wo.^E Venkateshwara^Rao.Aged about 50 years, Occ Househoid, R/o.^H No.2'20-30l1 ,^NewRamnagar Colony, Chilkanagar, Uppal, Hyderabad-500 039,^Telangana.

¶35

P Laxmi @ Vulam Laxmamma, W/o. V.Yellappa, Aged about^{47 years. Occ} Agriculture, R/o. H.No.2-20-2811, New Ramnagar Colony, Chilkanagar,^Uppal, Hyderabad-500 039, Telangana

¶36

4 Harsha @ Eruku Harshavardhan. S/o. E.Yellappa, Aged about^{21 years. Occ} Student, R/o H.No.2-20-2811 , New Ramnagar Colony, Chrlkanagar,^Uppal, Ir,4edch a l-Malkajg iri Diskict-500 092, Telangana.

¶37

E.Devendhar @ Eda Devender Goud, S/o^{E.VenkateshwaraRao,Aged} about 30 years, Occ Bustness, R/o. H.No.3'100/1/T, Srrnagar^Coiony, Bodduppal, Medchal-Malkajgiri District-500 092,^Telangana

¶38

Jyosthna @ Golati Joshnavi, D/o G.Krishna^{Aged about 25 years, OccPvt} Employee, R/o. H.No.2-20-30l1, New Ramnagar Colony, Chrlkanagar,^Uppal, Hyderabad-500 039, Telangana.

¶39

Venkateshwarlu @ Eda Venkateshwar Rao, S/o.^{Laxmana SwamyAged} about 55 years, Occ Business, R/o. H.No.2-20-3011,^{New RamnagarColony,} Chilkanagar, Uppal, Hyderabad-500 039,^Telangana.

¶40

Neelima @ Y.Neelima, Wo. Y.Ashok, Aged^{about31 years,Occ Pvt} Employe, R/o. H.No.2-20-3011, New Ramnagar Colony, Chilkanagar,^Uppal, Hyderabad-500 039, Telangana.

¶41

...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOs¹ to I

¶42

AND

¶43

1 The State of Telangana, Rep by its Public^{Prosecutor, HighCourt for the} State of Telangana At Hyderabad.

¶44

Jakkula Chandra Kala, W/o. J Yadagiri. Age - 43 yea s Occ House wife, R/o H. No-2 20-301118, New Ram Nagar Colony Chilkanagar. uppal, Hyderabad-500 039, Telangana.

¶45

...RESPONtrl NT/COMPLAINANT Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that rn the r ircumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petitron, the ligh Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings agatnst the Petitioners/A: ;used Nos.1 to I in Cr.No.1'144 of 2025 of Uppal Police station, lVledchal- lVlalkalgrr Drstrict l.A. NO: 2 OF 2025

¶46

Petrtion under Sectron 528 of BNSS praying that tn the ( rcumstances stated in the lt4emorancjum of Grounds of Criminal Petition. the ligh Court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings includrng he arrest of the Petitioners/Accused Nos 1 to 8 in Cr No 1 144 of 2025 ot -j tpal Police Station I\iledchal - Malkalg[r District pending disposal of the above queil h petttron

¶47

These Petitions coming on for hearing upon perusing lre Memorandum of Grounds of Crimjnal Petition and upon hearing the argunr, nts of Sri VEERA. BABU GANDU Advocate for the Petittoner and the Additionil Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none for the Res tondent No. 2.

¶48

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶49

'-jqffigffi#/.l'J{lYPn 'j : :-^' V ,f .. /'' ./|.

¶50

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.1 3347 13348 AND 13349 aF 2025

¶51

COMMON ORDER:

¶52

Crl.P.No.13347 of 2025 is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos.1 to 4 seeking to quash the^proceedings against^{them in} Crime No.1176 of 2025 on the file of Uppal Police^Station, Rachakonda, registered for the offences under Sections¹²⁶⁽²⁾ and 351(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,2023 (for short, 'BNS').

¶53

2 Crl.P.No,'1 3348 of 2025 is filed by the^{petitioners-accused} Nos.1 to 3 seeking to quash the^proceedings against themⁱⁿ Crime No.1129 of 2025 on the file of Uppal^{PoliceStation,} Rachakonda, registered for the offences under Sections^329(4), 324(4), I 15(2) and 351(2) read with 3(5) of BNS.

¶54

Crl.P.No.l3349 of 2025 is filed by the^{petitioners-accused} Nos.l to B seeking to quash the^proceedings against them in Crime No.1144 of 2025 on the file of Uppal Police Station, Rachakonda, registered for the offences under Sections 329(4), 1 15&! and 351(2) read with 3(5) of BNS

¶55

') ul I),1 Crl P I I ll3I7of2025 & batcll

¶56

Heard Sri G Veera Babu, learned () )unsel for the petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, le t rned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1 I itate.

¶57

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitt rd that multiple F.l.Rs. are being registered against the petitioner; based on the same cause of action, which is not tenable in the rye of law. He further submitted that it is setfled law that no per,; rn can be trred more than once for the same offences and in sp l-. of the same, multiple F.l. Rs. have been registered against he petitioners herein, which amounts to double jeopardy. He firr iher submitted that one case is fired by the wife and the other twc ;ases are fired by the husband based on the same incident. The rllegations are purely civil in nature and that O.S.Nos.417 of 20.,2 I and 1263 of 2025 are pending on the file of learned ll Additior at Junior Civil Judge, Medchal-Malkajgiri District, in respect lf the same property and hence, initiation of criminal proceedirrr s against the petitioners itself is not maintainable. He, theref:.e, prayed to quash the proceedings in the present crimes; against the petitioners herein.

¶58

E'ID.J Crl.P.No.l3l47 of2025 & batoh

¶59

¶60

Learned Additional Public^{Prosecutor submitted that the} cause of action and the incidents are^{differentin all the three} cases and therefore, it does not amount^{to registrationof multiple} F.l.Rs. based on a single incident.^{The investigationis still in} progress. Therefore, there are no merits in the Criminal^Petitions and hence, the same are liable to^{be dismissed.}

¶61

7. Perused the record

¶62

B ln Crl.P.No.13347 o'f 2025, the allegations^{point out that} earlier the de facto complainant^{lodged a complaint againstthe} petitioners herein and in spite of the same, there^{is no change In} their behavior and that again^{petitioner No.4 has been parkinghis} car in front of the house^{of the de facto complainant and locking} the gate and when lhe de^{facto complainant asked him to open} the lock and remove the car,^{he threatenedthe de facfo} complainant that he will not open^{the lock and that he will seehis} end. The date of alleged^{offence is priorto 10.10.2025.}

¶63

ln Crl.P.No.13348 of^2025, the^{allegations are that the} petitioners went to the old house of the de facfo complainant^and damaged the CCTV cameras and compound^{wall and when the} rl..\

¶64

I I t t I

¶65

4 I,'fD,J Crl.l, l\ ) I.l.l47 of20?5 & batch

¶66

de facto complainant questioned their acts, th: accused have threatened him and his family members that thel voutd kill them, as the land belongs to them and quarreled rr lr the de facto complainant and pushed away the de facto com6 lainant and his wife. The date of alleged offence is 27.09.2025.

¶67

10 In Crl P.No 13349 of 2025, it is alleged thal the petitioners have trespassed into the house of the de facto r r mplainant and threatened the de facto complainant and her fir nily members. The date of alleged offence is 03..1 0.2025

¶68

Thus, three F.l.Rs. are registered based orr three different incidents. lt is made out that there are disputes b<:.ween both the parties and there have been several instances t lt cropped up between the de faclo complainants and the petil oners herein, which gave rise to the present complaints. Though the petitioners' counsel contends that multiple F.l.Rs. tre registered based on a singte incident, the contents of the c<l nplaints in all the F.l.Rs. are different and they point out with rege "d to different incidents alleged to have occurred on three di rerent dates. Therefore, it cannot be said that multiple F.l.Rs : re registered based on a single incident.

¶69

¶70

/'J

¶71

5 DTD,J Crl.P No.13347 of2025 & barch

t I

a.^.:.i ?!.. ../:

'/..

Learned counsel for the petitioners in support of his submissions has relied upon a decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in T.T. Antony v. State of Kerala and othersl, wherein the Honourable Supreme Court while dealing with a case, wherein in respect of the same cognizable offence and same occurrences, two F.l Rs. had been lodged, held that there can be no second F.l.R. and that there can be no fresh investigation on receipt of every subsequent information in respect of the same cognizable offence or the same occurrence or incident giving rise to one or more cognizable offences. But, the facts of the present cases differ from the said decision, since the present F.l.Rs. are registered based on different incidents. Therefore, the said decision cannot be applied to the cases on hand. The truth or otherwise of the allegations are yet to be culled out. As the investigation is still in progress, it is not proper to quash the proceedings in the present crimes at this stage. However, since the offences alleged against the petitioners are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years, it is

' izoorl6 scc^{r sr}

i ! I I I

!Itr,t

6 DlI),J a.rl.L o.ll317 o12025 & baroh

¶81

deemed appropriate to direct the police to invol:r Section 35 (3) of BNSS

¶82

Accordingly, the Criminal petitions are drsp< sed of directrng the petitroners to appear before the lnve s igating Officer concerned on or before 27.11.2025 between I^'l :00 At\rl and 5:00 PlV, and in turn, the lnvestigating Officer is rl 'ected to follow the procedure laid down under Section 35(3) o, BNSS and the guidelines formulated by the Hon'ble Apex Cc :rt in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar2 scrupulously and the, petitioners are also directed to co-operate with the lnvestigatirrry Officer and to furnrsh the requisite information and document:i as and when required by him.

¶83

[\rliscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, sha I stand closed

¶84

SD/- A.H ! . GOWRI SHANKAR ASI} STANT REGISTRAR

lot

//TRUE coPY//

SECTION OFFICER

1 i ne Vi Addinonal Metropoliran Magistrate, tvledchal, I,4a l k rjgrri 2. The Station House Officer, Uppal police Station, Medch; t^.Malkajgiri District 3 One CC to SRt VF|RA BABU GANDU AOvocate lOpL (j 4 Two CCs to the ADDTTTONAL pUBLtC PROSECUTOR, I igh Court for the hl _^{Srate of Tetengana, at Hyderabad.} [OUT] U' 5 Two CD Copies

¶89

'1:o^{r+; a} scc zu:

¶90

HIGH COURT DATED:06i 11/2025

¶91

COMMON ORDER

¶92

CRLP.Nos.13347. 13348 and 13349 ot 2O25

¶93

I
1
[;. i ?W
,/

¶94

DISPOSING OF THREE CRIMINAL PETITIONS