Disposed

Tanniru Raju v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC8 Jul 2025CRLP/8081/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused in a criminal case for offences under Sections 324, 504 and 506 IPC sought dispensation of their personal appearance during trial under Section 528 BNSS. The High Court dispensed with in-person presence, subject to appearance through counsel at every adjournment and physical presence when directed by the trial court.

What did the court decide?

In-person appearance of petitioners in C.C. No. 815 of 2024 dispensed with, subject to appearance through counsel and presence when directed.

Tanniru Raju Vs The State of Telangana — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

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

¶2

TUESDAY ,THE^{EIGHTH DAY OF JULY} NTVO THOUSNND^{ANDTWENTY FIVE}

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HoNouReelE^{snt JUSTIcEN'TUKARAMJI}

¶5

CRIMIN AL^{PETITION NO:8081oF 2025}

¶6

Between:

¶7

Tanniru^{Raju,S/o' T Venkateshwarlu' Aged 2hnrrt 47 Years Occ' Labour} contractor^{(Mason).iii":'ii"il;:'i'-i'iji1;Pn,'El;t No 1e Ram Naresh Nasar'} HydernagarVilr,g",^{[t1i'iJ'iilrt,tanoii'vtotnat-tvt'lxaigi'iDistrict 500085}

¶8

'lll;riffi :f^{ri,rffi[#!]"fln"iffi13?i{ff6'Jfip} ff^;i'?'inxlls: KukatPallY^Mandal'

¶9

Tanniru^{Venkateshwarlu @ venkate'sh''9/o'Tanniru Raiu' Aged about2'1} years, occ. stuo"ni]Hi6 H rtrt'i-l7l+e/-1 '.Prnt^{No ts Ram Naresh Nagar'} Hydernagar^{Virrage,'Kl'k"j6'rri,'ivrr.b"-r,'ririiair,"iit^riXuigiriDistrict.- 500085-} (T.S )

¶10

Tanniru^{Naveen,S/o TanniruRqiu'-Aged. about 18 Years' Occ Student' R/o} H. No.^{1-1-2'11+alr] proi"rlt isi nafr'- N"esh Naoar'Hvdernagar vrllage'} Kukatpallv^{Mandal. il#i';i"tt'l;ii'idiioisiti"t'- 5006s5 - (T's )}

¶11

...PETITIONERS

¶12

AND

¶13

1 . The^{Stateof Telangana,. Represented by its PublicProsecutor'High Court for} ' the State of Telangana, HyderaDao'

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

Tanniru^{Bapamma,W/o T Venkateshwarlu'Aoed about T3years'Occ'} Housewife'^{nlo.r,nl"tiioolriirjlii"'r""gntoor.tranoii onsolr District- (A P )}

¶16

...DEFACTO^COMPLAINANT

¶17

PetitionunderSection52EofBNSSprayinothatinthecircumstances stated^{in the Memorandrr"} "i^{6-r"r"Os of Crimin;lFetition,the High Courtmay} be oleased^{to quashtn""p'.leJingsagainstthePetitioners in c c. NO 815 oF} zo)q, on^{the fite} "f^{th5',;5;;' o',i tn"" nootional Juniorcivil Judge -cum-} iv nlroii."ri^{Metropolitan Magistrate'Kukatpally'}

¶18

r.A. NO: 't^{oF 2025}

¶19

Petition^{under Section528 of BNSS PrlYi1othat in the circumstances} stated in^{the Memorand"'""t6'"'"os of criminat Fetition' the High Courtmay} be oleased^{to grant ,,,v ot;l-t*lheiproceedingsincluding appearanceof the} Petitioners^{Nos. 1 to + p""t'l"t't"'C iiio' 815 dF 2024' on the file of the Court} of the Additional^{J"i;;''ii;ilJ"09"-a9'1t^XV Additional Metropolitan} Magistrate,^{Kukatpally, p"tai"g iitGaiof the main quashproceedings'}

¶20

-7/

¶21

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. M.v.Hanumantha Rao, Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additionar pubric prosecutor, High court for the state of rerangana, Hyderabad on behalf of the State/ Respondent No.1.

¶22

The Court made the following: ORDER:

¶23

THE HONOURABLE^{SRIJUSTICEN. TUKARAMJI}

¶24

CRIMINAL^{PETITIO N No.808 1 of 2025}

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

This^{petitionis filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik} Suraksha sanhita,^{2023 seeking quashment of the proceedings in} C.C.No.B1 5^{otf 2024pending on the file of the learned lV Additional Junior} Civil Judge-cum-XV^{AdditionalMetropolitan Magistrateat Kukatpally'} against the^{petitioners/accused Nos '1 to 4'}

¶27

2 HeardMr.V.HanumanthaRao,learnedcounselforthepetitioners, Mr.Jithender Rao^{Veeramalla,learned Additional Public Prosecutor} appearing^{for the respondent No.1-State'}

¶28

The petitioners^{are arrayed as accused Nos l to 4 in C C No'815 of} 2O?4 facing^{accusation under Sections 324, 504' 506 r/w 34 of lndian}

¶29

Penal Code

¶30

\ t

¶31

Learneci counsei^{for the petitionerswouldsubmitthat though the} petitioners got a strong^{case even for quashment, as they are determined} to see the^{process through,the insistencefor theirpresenceis causing} severe difficulty^{in pursuingtheir occupations and avocations Therefore'} prayed for dispensing their^{personal appearancein the proceedings'} unless^{presencean personis requiredand such directionwould redress}

\ t

their grievance

._:..i

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that there is^no specific objection for the^{prayer, however pleadedfor a direction for} appearance of the petitioners on the material^{stages in the proceedings.}

¶37

Having regard to the submissions, subject^{to the petitioners} appearance through their counsel on^{every adjournment and physical} presence as and when directed by the Court, the in-person^{presence of} the petitioners in the^{proceedings of the C.C No.815 of 2024 pending on} the file of the learned lV Additional^{JuniorCivi!Judge-cum-XV Additional} Metropolitan Magistrate at Kukatpally,^{is dispensedwith. Additionally it is} specified that any lapse in abiding^{the abo're conditionslvouldrenderthis} order ineffective.

¶38

7. With this direction, this Crimina!^{Petitionis disposedof}

¶39

Miscellaneous^{petitions, pendingif any, shall stand closed.}

¶40

Sd/. P,CH. NAGABHUSHAMBA DEPUry REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPYII

To,

SECTION OFFICER

1 il:?'.+:?Jl'",m",ojli,lio'^{civir Judse -cum XV Additionar} Metroporlan

¶45

2 The Station House Officer, KpHB police Station, Hyderabad.

¶46

J One CC to Sri. M,V.Hanumantha Rao, Advocate IOPUCJ

¶47

4 ti$afrjblic Prosecutor, High court ror the state or rerangana, fff.:r?j?

¶48

Two CD Copies.

PSK /PSL

HIGH COURT

DATED:0810712025

,i\l E I
n]..,
,,
t,i:
ls)
:f \rs$
,3
t<br>I rf.I

¶53

ORDER

¶54

CRLP.No.8081 of 2025

¶55

DISPOSED OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION

¶56

eK
qh

Tanniru Raju v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tanniru Raju 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

Sri.Shaik Abdul Nabi Vs The State of Telangana

Kummamuru Sarwagna @ Sarwagna Vivek Vs The State of Telangana

Nagender @ Nagender Rao Kodati Vs The State of Telangana

Syed akram ali Vs The State of Telangana

Kondasani Rajesh Vs The State of Telangana

Pendela Venkata Lakshmi alias Venkatamma Vs The State of Telangana