M/s Versatile Pharma Private Limited Vs The State of… — Company and Corporate | Telangana HC (2025)

M/s Versatile Pharma Private Limited Vs The State of… — Company and Corporate | Telangana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedies as available under law (including Section 482 CrPC / Section 528 BNSS) seeking quashment of the proceedings in C.C.No.714 of 2016 by raising all the grounds pleaded in the writ petition; no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking quashment of the proceedings in C.C.No.714 of 2016 is maintainable, having regard to the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Pradnya Pranjal Kulkarni v. State of Maharashtra. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Without expressing any opinion on the merits, the writ petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedies as available under law, seeking quashment of the proceedings in C.C.No.714 of 2016 by raising all the grounds pleaded in the writ petition.

Key takeaways

There shall be no order as to costs.ratio¶44
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.ratio¶45

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition disposed of — High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad (Hon'ble J. Sreenivas Rao), W.P. No. 27848 of 2022, disposed 13.10.2025. M/s Versatile Pharma Private Limited had sought a writ of certiorari under Article 226 declaring wholly illegal the complaint dated 12.08.2015 issued by the 4th respondent (Enforcement Officer, EPFO) vide AP/HYD/EO/Comp/C-1/t5t61555t2015tg73, and quashment of the proceedings in C.C.No.714 of 2016 before the XIX Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Malkajgiri, in which the company is arrayed as accused No.1 for offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC, 1860 and Section 14 of the EPF & MP Act, 1952 (arising from Cr. No. 578 of 2015, P.S. Kushaiguda; interim application under S. 151 CPC sought a stay). At the sitting of 26.09.2025 the learned AGP for Home (respondents 1 & 3) submitted that, by virtue of the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Pradnya Pranjal Kulkarni v. State of Maharashtra (footnoted reference No. 13424 of 2025, dt. 03.09.2025, partly illegible in source), the writ petition seeking quashment under Article 226 is not maintainable. At the resumed hearing petitioner's counsel conceded non-maintainability and sought liberty to pursue quashment under Section 482 CrPC / Section 528 BNSS, raising all grounds pleaded in the writ petition; respondents 1, 3 and 4 did not oppose. Taking the submissions into consideration, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court DISPOSED OF the writ petition granting that liberty; there shall be no order as to costs; pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand closed.

t³³⁰³ I

Ii,i: it t: li

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD} (Special Original Jurisdiction)

M o N DAY' IT,="It'XJS^{=^tH.,?,il^Pri ocro B E R}

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE SRTJUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO

WRIT PETITION NO: 27848 OF 2022

Between:

M/s Versatile Pharma Private Limited, A company registered^{under Companies Act,} 1956, Having its registered office at Plot No.92,^{Phase-[[,_1D4,Cherlapally,} Hyderabad, Telangana-SOOOSt. Rep by its^{ManagingDirector Sri. P.V. Nagendra} Reddy

...PETITIONER

AND

The State of Telangana, Rep by its Prl. Secretary, Home^Department, Secretariat, Hyd erabad

Union of lndia, Ministry of Labour, Rep. by its Secretary,^{New Delhi, lndia.}

The Station House Officer, P.S. Kushaiguda, Cyberabad.

...RESPONDENTS

Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Sri. G. Mttobha^Enforcement Officer, Enforcement Officer and Asst. Public^{Prosecutor, Regional Office,} Barakatpura, Hyderabad, Telangana-500027

... RESPONDENT/DE.FACTO GOM PLAINANT

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia^{prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court^{may be} pleased to grant an order, direction or writ more^pdrticularly in the nature of Writ of Certiorari declaring the action of the 4th^{Respondent in issuipg Complaint vide} AP/HYD/EO/Comp/C -1/t5t61555t2015tg73 dated^{12.08.2015 as whollyillegal,} arbitrary, highhanded and contrary to the^{provisions in the EmployeeProvident} Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act,^{1952,violative of Artictes 14, 16 and 21} of the Constitution of lndia,^{besides being violative of principles of natural justice}

and consequently the Hon'ble Court may be^{pleased to quash the proceedings} against the^retitioner company in C.C.No.71412016^{on the file of the Learned XIX} Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Malkajgiri.

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

Petitir>n under Section 151 CPC^praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the^{HighCourt may be pleasedto stay} all further proceedings against the Petitioners in Cr.^No. 578^{of 2015 on the} file^of the SHO, P.S. Kushaiguda, Cyberabad.

Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. V. MADHURI,^REPRESENTING SRI S. NAGESH REDDY

Counsel for the Respondents No.1 & 3: SRI^B. SRIDHAR,^AGPFORHOME Counsel for the Respondent No.2: DEPUTY^{SOLICITOR GENERALOF INDIA} Counsel for the Respondent No.4: Ms. ANDE^VISHALA

The Gourt nrade the following: ORDER

I: J

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE^{J. SREENIVAS RAO}

WRIT PETITIO N^{No.27848 of 2022}

o ER:

This writ Petition has^{been filed seeking to quash the} proceedings in c.c.No.714 of^{2016 on the file of the xlx} Additional Metropolitan^{Magistrate at Malkajgiri,wherein the} petitioner was arrayed as^{accused No.l, for the offences} punishable under Sections^{406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code,} 1860 and Section¹⁴ of^{the EmployeesProvident Funds and} Miscellaneous Provisions^{Act, 1952 -}

When the matter^{was taken up for considerationon} 26.09.2025, Mr.B.Sridhar,^{learned Assistant GovernmentPleader} for Home appearing^{for respondentNos.l and 3 submittedthat by} virtue of the^{principletaid down by the Hon'ble Apex Courtin} Pradnya Pranjal Kulkarni^{v. State of Maharashtrat,the writ} petition filed by the^{petitioner,seekingto quash the proceedings} in C.C.No.7l4 of^{2016 invoking the jurisdictionunder Article} 226 of the Constitution^{of India, is not maintainable under law'}

t sle lcRt-1 No.13424 of 2025, dt. 03.09.2025

rra S,

2

a1

However, zt request of Ms.V.Madhuri, leamed counsel represr:nting Mr.S.Nagesh Reddy, learned counsel for the petitiorrer, posted to l3 .10.2025

-[oday, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per thr: principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Prodnyo Pranjal Kulkorni's cose (supra), this writ petition is not mainthinable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. . .,

He further submitted that the petitioner may be granted liberry to avail ttLe remedies as available under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, l9T3lSection 528 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, seeking quashment of proceedings in C.C.No.7l4 of 2O|5, by raising all the grounds, which are pleaded in the present writ petition.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for respondent Nos.l and 3 and Ms.Ande Vishala, learned counsel for respondent No.4 has not opposed the same.

Taking into consideration the above submissions made by

the respective parties, and without expressing any opinion on the merits lrftrr" case, the writ petition is disposed of, granting

4

3

liberty to the petitioner to avail the remedies as available under law, seeking quashment of the proceedings in C.C.No.7l4^of 2016 by raising all the grounds which are^pleaded in this^writ

petition. There shall be no order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall^stand

closed.

Sd/-A.JAYAS ANT RE

\

To

/TRUE COPY/

N OFFICER

The Prl.^{Secretary,Home Department'State of} Secretariat, Hyderabad

2.TheSecretary,Unionoflndia,MinistryofLabour'NewDelhi'lndia'

The Station^{House Officer, P'S' Kushaiguda' Cyberabad'}

+.snt.G.VittobhaEnforcementofficer,-EmployeesProvidentFund oroanisation, Asst.^{pubric prose-cutor,'Regibndr office,Barakatpura,} HyEerabad,^{Tel angan a-50O027}

One CC^{to SRI S' NAGESH REDDY,Advocate [OPUC]}

Two ccs^{to Gp for Home, High court for the state of relanganaat} Hyderabad. [OUT]

One CC^{to Deputy Solicitor Generalof lndia [OPUC]}

One CC^{to Ms. ANDE VISHALA, Advocate IOPUC]}

Two CD^CoPies

MP PMK

?

/

I

HIGH COURT

DATED ;1311012025

a1 ,ii-lE S
u -r
LJ
O
06 fts flfr 7_

ORDER
{
WP.No.27848 ot 2022

DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION WITHOUT COSTS

-J-xs u l,lze