Dismissed

Devuni Pruthvi v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC15 Dec 2025CRLP/16632/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused No.3 sought quashing of proceedings under the PCPNDT Act alleging false implication with no specific allegations against him. The court found specific allegations disclosing offence ingredients, held disputed facts require full trial, dismissed the petition but dispensed with personal appearance subject to representation through counsel.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; personal appearance before the trial court dispensed with unless specifically required, subject to representation through counsel on each hearing date.

Devuni Pruthvi Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[33031

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

MONDAY,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 16632 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 Devuni Pruthvi, S/o Devuni Bhaskar, aged about^{24 yearc,0cc.Compounder/} Attendant at Samanvitha Hospital, Kamareddy,^{R'o H.No.5-8-351-2, Ashok} Nagar Colony, Opp. Thaher Garden, Kamareddy.

¶9

...PETITIONERYACCUSED No.3

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its^{Public Prosecutor, High Courtof} Telangana, Hyderabad.

¶12

...RESPONDENT NO.1

¶13

Dr. P.Chandra Shekar, S/o. Late^P. Janardhan,^{Aged about58 years,Occ} l/c. District, Medical and Health Officer and^{Member Secretary, Convener,} District Level Multi Member Appropriate Authority,^{PC and PNDT Act,} Kamareddy R/o. DM and HO at Kamareddy

¶14

... DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/RESPONDENT^No.2

¶15

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS^{praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum^{of Groundsof Criminal Petition, the High Court may} be pleased to^pleased to QUASH^{the Proceedings in Proceedingsin CC.No.44of} 2025 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate^{of First Classat Kamareddy'}

¶16

l.A. NO: 2OF 2025

¶17

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS^{praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum^{of Groundsof Criminal Petition,the High Court may} be pleased pleased to STAY of all^{furtherProceedingsin CC.No.44of 2025 on} the file of the Judicial Magistrate of^{First Class at Kamareddy, pending disposal} of the Criminal Petition.

¶18

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing I re [\4emorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the argume rts of Sri RAPOLU BHASKAR ,Advocate for the Petitioner and the JITHENDER RAO VEERAMALLA, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of 1l: Respondent No.1 and of None Appeared for the Respondent No.2.

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

!.:':P';a

¶21

II{ THE HIGH COURT F.OR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT I{YDERABAJ)

¶22

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENTVAS RAO

¶23

CRIMINAL PETITION No. 16 632 of2o25

DATE: 15.12.2025

Between :

Devuni Pruthvi

.... Petitioner/Accused No.3

¶28

AND

¶29

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad and another

¶30

... Respondents

¶31

the This criminal petition has been filed by petitioner/accused No.3 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.44 of 2025 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kamareddy, for the offences under Sections 3(3), 3A, 6(b)(c) and 23(1)(2) of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (for short, 'the PCPNDT Act) and Rules 6(6) and 8 of the Pre Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition and Sex Selection) Rules, 1996 (for short, 'the PCPNDT Rules).

¶32

¶33

Heard Mr. Rapolu Bhaskar, learned c() rnsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, lerL: ned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No. L

¶34

Learned counsel for the petitioner subrt tted that the petitioner ha s not committed the offences and te was falsely implicated in the present crime based upon 1 I e confessional statement given by the other accused. There ar,: no allegations, much less specific allegations, levelled against rI e petitioner to attract the ingredients for the offences under St:r tions 3(3), 3A, 6(b)(c) and 23(11(2) of the pCpNDT Act and Rules rj 6) and 8 of the PCPNDT of tlic Rules. He further submitted that <:r Ltire allegations are levelled against accused Nos. 1 and 2 only. As 1 er the contents of the complaint and charge sheet, the petrt oner has not conducted any test regarding pre-natal sex deternr nation. Hence, the continuation of the proceedings against the peL [ioner amounts to a clear abuse of the process of law.

¶35

Per contra, learned Additional public prose r utor submitted that there are specific allegations levelled agains I the petilioner. He further submitted that the ingredients for th,: offences under Sections 3(3), 3A, 6(b)(c) and 23(1)(s) of the pCpNt).. Act and Rules 6(6) and 8 of the PCPNDT Rules are attracted to th3 petitioner. The grounds, whiJh^are raised by the petitioner, have 1( be adjudicated

¶36

¶37

¶38

by the trial Court after full-fledged trial. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to seek quashing of the proceedings in C.C.No.44 of 2025.

¶39

)

¶40

Having considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and upon perusal of the complaint, and hnal report, it clearly reveals that there are specif-rc allegations against the petitioner to attract the ingredients for the offences under Sections 3(3), 3A., 6(b)(c) and 23(1)(s) of the PCPNDT Act and Rules 6(6) and 8 of the PCPNDT Rules. The contentions and grounds raised by the learned counsei for the petitioner are disputed facts and the same have to be adjudicated and decided by the trial Court after full-fledged trial and the same cannot be adjudicated in the present criminal petition. Hence, there are no grounds to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

¶41

Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed. However, taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the presence of the petitioner in C.C.No.44 ot 2025 is dispensed with, unless his presence is specilically required subject to the condition that the petitioner shall represent through his counsel on each and every date of hearing. In case of nonappearance of the petitioner on the specific date so hxed by the

¶42

¶43

¶44

trial Court for his appearance, the trial Court is entit ed to proceed

¶45

with the matter, in accordance with law.

¶46

Miscellaneous applications, pending if anr. shall stand

¶47

closed

¶48

SD/. BHAVANI SWAMY ASS t.tiTANT REGISTRAR