Disposed

Uppala Satyaarayana v. the State of Telangana

Telangana HC27 Jan 2025CRLP/9287/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, accused in a cheating case over borrowed computers shown to a college inspection to obtain affiliation and fee reimbursement, sought quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court declined to quash, finding prima facie allegations in the charge sheet, but permitted an application for dispensing attendance and directed expeditious trial.

What did the court decide?

Quashing refused; liberty granted to file application to dispense with attendance; trial court directed to complete trial within six months.

Uppala Satyaarayana Vs the State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

[^32s1 ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERAtsAD

¶3

MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9287 OF 2018

¶7

Between:

¶8

Uppala Satyaarayana, S/o Srihari, 49 years, Director, KITS Engineering College, Kodad, r/o. Huzurnagar.

¶9

Chilukuri Nagarjuna Rao, S/o Ch.B.Rama Rao, 60^yrs, Vice Principal^(i/c Principal), KITS Engineer College, Kodad, r/o. Huzurnagar.

¶10

Neela Satyanarayna, S/o Btxamaiah,45 yrs, President, Kakatiya Educational Society, r/o. H.No. 12-107/6, Main Road, Kodad.

¶11

Pothuluri Pandarinath, S/o Satyanarayana, 48^yrs, Principal, KITS College, Kodad, r/o. D.No.^'1 1/7, Katla Subbarao Thota, Eluru W.G.District

¶12

Nadipalli Suresh Kumar, S/o N.Parameshwara Rao, 43^yrs, Kamakshi Engineering College, Durajpally r/o. Near Bhoomireddy Hospital, VT.Colony, Suryapet.

¶13

V.Rama Raju, KITS College, Kodad, r/o. Akupamula Village of Munagala [/andal, Nalgonda District.

¶14

..,PETITIONERS/A1 TO 46

¶15

AND

¶16

The State Of Telangana, through The Station House Officer, Chivvemula Police Station, rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the States of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh.

¶17

Sri Dirshanapu Satyanarayana, S/o Not Known to the Peattioners, Age. Ivlajor, Occ. Retired Assistant Sub lnspector, R/o Sriram Nagar Colony, Near Registration Office, Suryapet Town and District. As per court order dated: 27 to1t2025'" , o Hg#3r*orr:i,TiJrdiltsiifftt_,

¶18

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to and connected with CC.No. 103112015, on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Suryapet.

¶19

LA. NO: 1 OF 2018

¶20

Petition under Section 482 of Cr. P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in CC.No. 1031/2015, on the file of Judicial First Class tVlagistrate, Suryapet including their appearance, pending disposal of the above criminal petition.

¶21

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri V BRAHMAIAH CHOWDARY, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and None Appeared for the Respondent No.2.

¶22

The Court made th,:r following: ORDER

¶23

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶24

CRIMINAL PETITION No. 9287 OF 2018

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

This Criminal Petition is Iiied under Section 482 of the Code of Crimina,l Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.J by the petitioners/A1 to A6 to quash the proceedings in CC.No.1031 of 2015 (otd number) on the lile of Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Suryapet,-C.C.No.2337 of 2018 (new number) on the file of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Suryapet. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 4 18, 42O, 126 (b) r/w. 109 of Indian Penal Code.

¶27

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent - State. Perused the record

¶28

The brief facts of the case are that A1 is Director, A.2 is Vice Principal, A'3 is chairman and A4 is Principal of KITS Engineering College, Kodad. There was shortage of computers for B.Tech, I year students in KITS Engineering Col1ege, Kodad. Meanwhile, the inspection of KITs college was scheduled to be held on 27.O5.20Ls by the Professors of JNTU for getting afhliation from JNTU in order to get the fee reimbursement of students from the Govt. of

¶29

¶30

Telangana, all the accused Nos. 1 to 4 colluded with accused No.5 who is the Administrative Officer of Kamakshi Engineering College, Durajpally, and took 7O computer systems from Kamakshi Engineering College and shifted them to KITS college, Kodad. The s:rme was done to create an impression before the Inspection Officials that the computers borrowed belong to their college. Thereafter, on 29.05.20 15 while the accused tried to 1n return the said computers to Kamakshi Engineering College Bus bearing No.AP 24 TC 0847, the Police apprehended them and registered the case

¶31

In the charge sheet, pima facie, there are certain allegations leveled against the petitioners herein. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings, against the petitioners herein.

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioners confines his arguments to dispense with the attendance of the accused.

¶33

In the said circumstances the Criminal Petition is disposed off and the petitioners are at liberty to file application under Rule37 of Cr.P.C. Upon filing such application, the same shall be considered by the Court below. However, the petitioners/accused shall appear as and when directed by the trial Court. Further, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the trial

/'l

Court is directed to conclude the process of trial as expeditiously as possible, within a period of six (6) months, from the date of receipt of copy of this order, in accordance with the provisions under Section 309 of Cr.P.C. which contemplates day-to-day trial of criminal offences till conciusion.

¶38

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand

¶39

closed.

¶40

Sd/- MOHD. ISMAIL ASSI TANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

I he Judicial Frrst Class^{Magistrate at Suryapet} Z. fne tt Additional^{Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Suryapet'} 3, The Station House^{officer,Chivvemla Police Station, Nalgond€ UlStrIcI,} + r*" CCI t" th; Public^{Prosecutor, High Cou1for the State of Telangana at} Hyderabad^(OUT) s. oire-c-C io SRt^{V aaenruAlAH cHowDARY,AdvocateIoPUC]} 6. Two CD CoPies I'r/gh

HIGH COURT

DATED: 27lQ112025

ORDER

CRLP.No.9287 of 2018

S TAra
/J
I
z
2 4 tlAR 20[
'/,
i t)€sPATC

¶52

DISPOSING OFF

¶53

THE CRL.PE]'ITION

¶54

I
@
b 1 e{
10

Uppala Satyaarayana v. the State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uppala Satyaarayana 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

Arigala Srinu , Yarra Srinu Vs the State of Telangana

M/s Swarna Bharathi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

R.K. Bhagwandas, Vs the State of a.P., Rep by Pp., and Another

Narne Gokul Vs the State of Telangana

G. Nagaveni Vs The State of Telangana

Mr. Indranil Mukherjee, Vs State of Telangana