Mohammed Nadeemuddin Vs The State of Telangana — Telangana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Mohammed Nadeemuddin Vs The State of Telangana — Telangana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Interim order at notice-before-admission stage: notice issued to respondent No.2 to show cause why the Criminal Petition should not be admitted (returnable 22.04.2025); personal notice by registered post (RPAD) with proof of service permitted; Investigating Officer directed to proceed with investigation in FIR No.90 of 2025, but petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 5 shall not be arrested pending the Criminal Petition; case listed on 22.04.2025.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Criminal Petition seeking quashment of the proceedings against the petitioners/Accused Nos.3 and 5 in FIR No.90 of 2025 (P.S. Malkajgiri, Rachakonda) should be admitted. +1 more

Court's answer

Notice to be issued to respondent No.2; learned counsel for the petitioners permitted to take out personal notice to respondent No.2 by registered post with acknowledgment due and to file proof of service in the Registry by the next date of hearing.

Ratio / Principle

In the said circumstances, the Investigating Officer in FIR No.90 of 2025 on the file of Malkajgiri Police Station, Rachakonda, against petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 5 is directed to proceed with the investigation.

Key takeaways

However, the petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 5 shall not be arrested, pending the Criminal Petition (interim protection from arrest).ratio¶30
The matter is to be listed on 22.04.2025.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Petition No.1877 of 2025 — Notice Before Admission — Quashing of FIR — S.528 BNSS — High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (Juwadi Sridevi, J.), 11.02.2025: Petitioners (Accused Nos.3 and 5) sought quashing of proceedings in FIR No.90 of 2025 of P.S. Malkajgiri, Rachakonda, contending through learned counsel that they are in no way concerned with the alleged offence; that a private complaint was lodged by the de facto complainant while civil suits are pending between respondent No.2 and Accused No.1; that Accused No.1 and petitioner No.2 do real estate business, petitioner No.1 being an advocate and legal advisor of Accused No.1 who gave legal opinion to Accused No.1, and was impleaded in the false crime out of grudge. The Court ordered notice before admission to respondent No.2 (de facto complainant), returnable on 22.04.2025, permitted personal notice by registered post with acknowledgment due with proof of service to be filed, directed the Investigating Officer to proceed with the investigation, but directed that the petitioners shall not be arrested pending the Criminal Petition, and listed the matter on 22.04.2025. Interim order only; no final determination on quashing.

13257 |

(sHow CAUSE NOTTCE BEFORE ADMtSStON) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY . TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

:PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUWADI SRIDEVI

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1877 OF 2025

Between:

Mohammed Nadeemuddin, S/o Mohammed Naseeruddin

lvlohammed Nayeemuddin, S/o. tvlohammed Naseeruddin

Petitioners/Accused No.3 and 5

AND

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana At Hyderabad.

Syed Sajid Ali, S/o late Syed Wazir Ali, Rio. H.No.1 -5-167, lndiranagar, Tandur, Vikarabad District.

Respondents/Defacto Complai nant

WHEREAS the Petitioners above named through their Advocate Sri KHAJA VIZARATH ALI presented this Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/Accused No.3 and 5 in F.l.R.No.90 of 2025 on the file of P.S. Malkajgiri, Rachakondaand;

AND WHEREAS the High Court upon perusing the petition and memorandum of grounds filed herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri KHAJA VIZARATH ALl, Advocate for the Petitioners and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the Respondent No.1, directed issue of notice to the Respondent No.2, herein to show cause as to why this CRIIUINAL PETITION should not be admitted.

You viz:

Syed Sajid Ali, S/o. late Syed Wazir Ali, R/o H.No.1-5-167,lndiranagar, Tandur, Vikarabad District.

are directed to show cause on or before 22.04.2025 to which date the case stands posted as to why in the circumstances set out in the petition and the memorandum of grounds filed therewith (copy enclosed) this CRltt/INAL PETITION should not be admitted.

lA NO: 2 OF 2025

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the grounds filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be^pleased to stay

all further proceedings including arrest of the^{petitioner/A<;cused No.3 and5} F.l.R.No.90 of 2025 on the file of^{P.S. tt/alkajgiri, Rachakondapending disposalof} CRLP No. 1877 of 2025, on the file of the High Court.

The Court made the following: ORDER:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners"

lssue notice to respondent No.2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners is also^permitted to take out personal notice to respondent No.2 by registered post with acknowledgment due and file proof of service in the Registry by the next date of hearing.

Heard Sri Khaja Vizarat Ali, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners-accused Nos.3 and 5 and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and^perused the record.

Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner:s submits that the petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 5 are no way concerned with the alleged offence. A private complaint is lodged by the de fac:to complainant, as there are civil suits pending between the respon,dent No.2 and the accused No.1. Accused No.1 and petitioners hereinr are family friends and accused No.1 and petitioner No.2 herein are doing real estate business, petitioner No.I is an advocate and he is legal advisor of accused No.1 and there is no role of the petitioner:; herein in the said crime. lt is further submitted that respondent No.2 created documents and filed false suits against accused No.1 and the pertitioners herein and trying to grab the land of accused No.1, being a legal advisor of accused No.l the accused No.3 interfered and given the legal opinion to accused No.1 and keeping grudge in mind impleaded in ther above false crime. Hence, he seeks to stay all further proceedings against the petitioner.

ln the said circumstances, the lnvestigating O'l'ficer in FIR No.90 of 2025 on the file of Malkajgiri Police Station, Flachakonda against petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 5 is directed to proceed with the

investigation. However, the petitioners/accused Nos.3 and 5 shall not be arrested, pending Criminal Petition.

List on 22.04.2025.

A .-

SD/.L.LAKSIINII BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

/TRUE COPYII

S OFFICER

To,

The Prl. Junior Civil JuniolCirit Judge-Cum-Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal-Malkajgiri. ,

The Station Hopse Offiier, Police Station lt/alkajgiri, Rachakonda.

Syed Sajid Ali, S/o. late Syed WazirAli, Occ. Business, R/o H.No.1-5-167, lndiranagar, Tandur, Vikarabad District. (by RPAD- along with a copy of petition and merporandum of grounds)

One CC to SRI KHAJA VIZARATH ALl, Advocate [OPUC]

Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court at Hyderabad [OUT]

One spare copy /

HIGH COURT

JS,J

DATED i11 .02.2025

LrsT oN 22.04.2025

, NOTICE BEFORE ADMISSION

1
( rO. 1q;[., 1l
::-; <br>L) {r ,a
(- , ;:;:-t.,1.r'lrr'
{( D L.. .,,7
T
\ ---'

CRLP.No.1877 of 2025

DIRECTION