Disposed

Sara Vikram Raj v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC14 Aug 2025CRLP/9498/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of a pending criminal case under Sections 447 and 427 IPC alleging a purely civil property dispute. The High Court declined to interfere at this stage but dispensed with their personal presence before the trial court, subject to representation by counsel, and directed expeditious disposal.

What did the court decide?

Quashing declined; personal presence of petitioners before trial court dispensed with subject to counsel appearing on every date; trial court directed to dispose of C.C. No. 502 of 2024 expeditiously.

Sara Vikram Raj Vs State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

f i

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9498 OF 2025

¶7

Between:

¶8

'l . Sara Vikram Raj, S/o. Late Sara Balwanth Raj Aged aboul 27 years, Occ Pvt Employee, R/ o. H. No. 1- 31/ 32, Batasingaram Village, Absullapurmet Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶9

Sara Prem Raj, S/o. Late Sara Balwanth Raj Aged about 26 years, Occ Pvt. Employee, R/ o. H. No. 1- 31 / 32, Batasingaram Village, Absullapurmet Mandal' Ranga Reddv District

¶10

...'ETIT..NERS/ACCUSED No.1 To 2

¶11

ANO

¶12

1 State of Telangana, Represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad

¶13

2 Sri. Penumatsa Venkata Shiva Prasad Murthy Raju, S/o. Srirama Ra1u, aged about 60 years, Occ Busines, R/o. H. No. 27117- 13, ASR Nagar, Bhimavaram, West Godavari District Andhra Pradesh

¶14

...RESPONDENTS/DE.FACTO COMPLAINANT

¶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 proceedings in C. C. No. 502/2024 for the alleged offences under Sec. 447 , 427 , r/w 34 IPC on the file of the XIV Additional Judicial lVlagistrate of First Class Ranga Reddy District at Hayathnagar against the petitioners/Accused No. 1 to 2

¶16

l.A. NO: 1OF 2025

¶17

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying ihat in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further^proceedings including^personal appearance of the petitioner in C.C. No. 5O212024 on the file of the XIV Additional [Vletropolitan Magistrate at Cyberabad, At Hayathnagar pending disposal of the main petition for quashing the same

¶18

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri PRAVEEN BONKURI, Advocate for the Petitioners and SRI JITHENDER RAO VEERAMALLA, Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.'l and None Appeared for the Respondent No.2

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

I \

¶21

I I

¶22

THE HON'BLE SMT, JUSTICE TIRUMALA T)EVI EADA

¶23

CRIMINAL P ETITION No.9498 of i:025

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This criminal petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C. No.502 of 2024 against lhe petitioners_ Accused Nos.1 & 2 on the file of the XIV Adrlitional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ranga Reddy District at Hayathnagar, for the offences under Sections 442, 427 read with 34 lpc.

¶26

Heard Mr.Praveen Bonkuri, learned c:ounsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learr.red Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1 -State.

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioners sL bmits that the de facto con.rplainant is a third party and has no right over the property, but has filed the complaint with all false alle,;ations. The matter is purely civil in nature and hence, prayed to quash the proceedings.

¶28

Learned Additional^public prosecutor opposed the petition submitting that the prima facie case is madt: cut from the allegations and that the prosecution has nothing tr do whether the matter is of civil nature or not.

¶29

¶30

5. Perused the record

¶31

A perusal of the record discloses that CC No.502 of 2025 against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 447, 427 read with 34 lPC, is pending for trial before the trial court This Court is not inclined to interfere with the^judicial process at this stage. Hence, in the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court deems it appropriate to dispense with the presence of the petitioners before the trial court and to direct the trial court to dispose of the matter at the earliest

¶32

Accordingly this Criminal Petition is disposed of directing the trial court to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible and dispensing with the^presence of the^petitioners before the trial court^provided they are represented by a counsel before the trial court on every date of hearing and shall appear before the trial court whenever their^presence is required during the course of trial.

¶33

Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- M. JAWAHAR REDDY TANT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

ECTION OFFICER

To,

1 The XIV Additional Judicial^{Magistrate of First Class Ranga ReddyDistrict at} Hayathnagar

¶39

The Station House Officer,^{Abdullapurmet Police Station,Abdullapurmet,} Rachakonda District

¶40

One CC to SRI PRAVEEN BONKURI Advocate [OPUC]

¶41

¶42

Two CCs to Pubhc Prosecutor. Hrgh Court for the State o'Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶43

Two CD Copies

VM/gh

HIGH COURT

{

DATED: 1410812025

ORDER

CRLP.No.9498 ot 2025

'::. -
nI 0t i 2[?:
<br>..,i\1

¶52

DISPOSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION

¶53

y>
I0<br><br>

Sara Vikram Raj v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sara Vikram Raj v. 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

M/s. The T.S.R.T.C. Vs Kethavath Hunny and Another

Gadhagoni Chakradhar Goud Vs The State of Telangana

K. Sumalatha Vs Ch. Sudarshan

Smt. Avula Ramulamma Vs Bhonagiri Yadaiah and Another

Mr. Prasad Anand Telang Vs The State of Telangana

Attuluri Navven Kumar @ Naveen Vs The State of Telangana