Disposed

Syed Khajim Ali, v. the State of Telangana

Telangana HC10 Nov 2025CRLP/14516/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR under Sections 329(3) and 324(4) BNS as a retaliatory counter-complaint. Counsel restricted the prayer to a direction to follow Section 35(3) BNSS procedure. The court declined to examine merits and directed the petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer by a fixed date, with Section 35(3) BNSS and Arnesh Kumar guidelines to be followed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to appear before IO on or before 01.12.2025; IO to follow Section 35(3) BNSS and Arnesh Kumar guidelines; petition disposed.

Syed Khajim Ali, Vs the State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

134441

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAO

¶3

MONDAY,THE TENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENW FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 14516 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

Syed Kha,iim Ali,, S/o Syed Skiender Ali, aged about 60 years, Occupation. House hold, R/o H.No. 150/360/191/135, Ground Floor, Near Anjaiah Nagar Masjid,kothaguda, Gachibowli, K.V. Ranga Reddy District, Telangana - 500084 Aadhaar No. 6797 8823 1145

¶9

Shahajada,, S/o Syed Khajim Ali, aged about 39 years (Date of Birth. 06/10/1986), Occupation. Private Work,Rt/o H.No. 1S0/30/'191/135, Near Anjaiah Nagar Majid, Gachibowli,Kothaguda, K.V. Ranga Reddy District, Telangana - 500084. Aadhaar No.. 3995 0617 8978 Mobi1e.9959427896

¶10

...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED

¶11

AND

¶12

1 THE STATE OF TELANGANA, Represented by the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad- 500066.

¶13

2 Syed Ali Abbas,, S/o Syed Khajam Hussain, aged about 39 years, Occ. Business, R/o H. No. 1 -60130 I 1 281 1 36, Anjaiah Nagar, Gachibowli, Ran ga Reddy District, Telangana -500084.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS

¶15

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 FIR and all further proceedings in Crime No. 931/2025 of Raidurgam Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate dated 281812025, registered under Sections 329(3) and 324(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (2023) (corresponding to Sections 448 and 506 IPC), as being false, fabricated, malicious, and an abuse of the process of law, the same having been lodged as a retaliatory counter-blast to the petitioners' bona-fide complaints before the Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad and the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) concerning the large-scale cheating and misappropriation of public funds committed by Syed Khajam Hussain and his associates through Sree Ramalingeswara Weaker Section Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Regn. No. 27111980, which is already the subject of Crime No. 550/2022 of Raidurgam P.S. and C.C. No. 584/2023 before the Xlll A.J.M.F.C., Ranga Reddy District; and further declare that the present complainant is a third party with no locus standi to the petitioners' property and has been used merely as an instrument to restrain and silence the petitioners from pursuing their legitimate complaints; and to hold

¶16

¶17

/'/'

¶18

that the alleged dispute pertains solely to the petitioners' I rurfu I ownership and possession of property H.No. 1-60/3011911135, Anjaiah Na ar, Gachibowli, duly purchased through a notarised sale deed dated 10-06-2( '1 1 from Syed lqbal Hussain for Rs.8,00,000/-; and consequently to set aside tl' -,^impugned FIR and investigation and pass such other order or direction as tl i , Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and pass sucl )ther order or orders may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶19

t.A. NO: 2OF 2025

¶20

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that l r the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition. :l e High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings and investigation in tl ime No. 93112025 of Raidurgam Police Station, Cyberabad Commissioneratr daled 281812O25. including any coercive action against the petitioners, and r irect the respondent police not to arrest or interfere with the petitioners' peace'i I possession of their property bearing H No. 1-60/3011911135, Anjaiah Nagar, o :chibowli, which was lawfully purchased through a notarised sale deed dated '( -06-2011 from Syed lqbal Hussain, pending final hearing and disposal of this p: ition, and pass such other order or direction as this Honble Court may deem it and proper in the interest of justice.and pass such other order or orders may c -'em^{fit and properin} the circumstances of the case.

¶21

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing :he Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the argum: rts of Sri SANTOSH PAVAN BABU G, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jither ler Rao Veeramalla, the Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respo'r lent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No.2.

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶23

¶24

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEV! EADA

¶25

CRIMINAL PETITION No.14516 ot2O25

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short^{'BNSS') seekingthe} Court to quash the^proceedings against the^{petitioners/accused} Nos.1 & 2 in Crime No.931 of 2025, on the file of Raidurgam^Police Station, Cyberabad District, registered^for the^{offencespunishable} under Sections 329(3) and 324(4) of BNS,^2023.

¶28

Heard Sri G.Santosh Pawan Babu, learned^{counsel for the} petitioners/accused Nos.1 & 2 as well as Sri Jitender Rao Veeramalla, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor^{appearing for} the respondent No.¹ -State.

¶29

Learned counsel for the^petitioners has restricted^his submission stating that a direction be issued^{to the Policeto follow} the procedure prescribed under Section 35⁽³⁾ of Bharatiya^Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short^'BNSS').

¶30

On the other hand, the learned Additional^{PublicProsecutor} has submifted that^petitioner No.2/accused^{No.2 was alreadyserved} with notice under Section 35⁽³⁾ of^{BharatiyaNagarik Suraksha} Sanhita, 2023 and therefore requested^{to pass appropriate orders.}

¶31

¶32

ETDJ Crl P.No.14516 2025

¶33

Considering the submissions of both the learrr rd counsel and the material available on record, it is seen that he allegations levelled against the petitioners pertain to the r ffences under Sections 329(3) and 32ag) of BNS, 2023 and t re punishment prescribed for the offences alleged against the ptr tioners is less than seven (07) years. Since it is brought to the noti ;e of this Court that accused No.2 has already been served will notice under Section 35 (3) of BNSS, 2023, hence, without going into the merits of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to direr; the petitioners to appear before the lnvestigating Officer on or bei rre 01.12.2025 between 11:00 a.m. and 05:00 p.m. and in turn, lle lnvestigating Officer is directed to follow the procedure laid down tr rder Section 35 (3) of the BNSS (previously Section 41-A of Crirr nal procedure Code, 1973) and also the guidelines formulated ,y the Hon,ble Supreme Court of lndia in Arnesh Kumar y. {ir ate of Biharl scrupulously. However, the petitioners shall submit th rir defense and co-operate with the lnvestigating Officer as and wh:n required by furnishing information and producing all relevant dor;r ments/material required for the purpose of investigation and the lnvr-. ;tigating Officer shall consider the same and complete the investig rtion strictly in accordance with law.

¶34

I lzor+; a scc zzs

¶35

¶36

ErOJ Crl.P.No.14516 Z)2S

¶37

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

¶38

As a sequel, miscellaneous^{petitions pending,} if^any,shall

¶39

stand closed.

¶40

sD/-v. KAy A DEPUry RE€ISTRAR

/ffRUE COPY//

CTION OFFICER

To,

The Xlll Addl. Judicial Magistrate^{of First Class, Ranga Reddy District at} Rajendranagar.

¶45

The Station House Officer, Police Station,^{Raidurgam, Cyberabad} Commissionerate

¶46

Two CCs to the PUBLIC^{PROSECUTOR,HighCourt at Hyderabad. (OUT)} 4. One CC to SRI SANTOSH^{PAVAN BABU G Advocate} [OPUCI

¶47

Two CD Copies

TPK,/PSL

i i I II

HIGH COURT

DATED:1011112025

:.'
S14 It
()o 1[ N 2J2E
\c'
r-:.
*
e
c-',1

¶54

ORDER

¶55

CRLP.N o.14516 of 2025

¶56

CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISPOS}ED OF

¶57

q
\

Syed Khajim Ali, v. the State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Syed Khajim Ali, 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

Ravula Venkanna Vs The State of Telangana

Shaik Jameel Vs The State of Telangana

Pillalamarri Rajesh Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Kotikalpudi Parvathi Pallavi Vs The State of Telangana

Pendyala Prakasham alias Prakash Vs Sri Thurpunoori Jangaiah

Badavath Raja, Vs The State of Telangana.