Dendi Rajender Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and another

¶1

[³⁴⁴⁴ |

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR iHE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 3278 OF 2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Dendi Rajender Reddy, S/o Ram Reddy, Aged about 50 years, Occ: Business, R/o Plot No.141 and^'150 Saipuri Colony, Sainikpuri, Kapra Mandal, Medchal - Malkajgiri District.

¶9

.. Petitioner/Accused

¶10

AND

¶11

'1 . The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.

¶12

Narayan Suresh Kumar, S/o Narayanan, Aged about 43 years, Occ: Business, R/o Plot No.170-A, Eshwaripuri Colony, Sainikpuri, Kapra Mandal, Medchal - Malkajgiri District

¶13

..Defacto ComplainanU Respondent No.2

¶14

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Crimlnal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in S.C.No.100 of 2020 dated 20-06-2020 on the file of the Special Judge for Trial of cases under Trial for SC & ST POA ACT Cases cum Vll ADJ Cou( Cyberabad at L.B Nagar against the Petitioner/Accused.

¶15

l.A. NO: 1OF 2023

¶16

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 S.C.No.100 of 2020 dated 20-06-2020 on the file of the Special Judge for Trial of cases under Trial for SC & ST POA ACT Cases cum Vll ADJ Court Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar against the Petitioner/Accused; pending disposal of the Main Quash Petition in the interest of the^justice.

¶17

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the lVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri P Vamsheedhar Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri D. Madhava Rao, Advocate for the Respondent No.2.

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶20

THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

¶21

CRIMINAL PETITIO N No. 3278 of 2023

Date:13.02.2026

Betwee n:

Dendi Rajender Reddy

Petitioner/Accused

And

State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,

¶28

High Court at Hyderabad and another

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

Respondents

¶31

This criminal petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitroner-accused in sc No.100 of 2o2o on the file of the Special Judge for trral of cases under trial for SC & ST pOA Act Cases-cum-Vll Additional District Judge Court, Cyberabad at L.B. Nagar. for the offence under Section 3(t )(p)(0 of the Scheduled castes and Schedured rribes (prevention of Atrocities) Act, 19g9 (for short^'SC & ST Act')

¶32

2 Heard Sri P Vamsheedhar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional public Prosecutor representing the respondent No.1_State and Sri D. Madhava Rao, learned counsel for the respondent No,2

¶33

ETD,J Crl.P. No.3278 of²⁰²³

¶34

2,

¶35

The case of the de faclo complainant is that earlier^the petitioner herein has lodged a complaint against him and his brother stating that his brother borrowed an amount of Rs.65.00 lakhs and failed to repay the said amount. Basing on the same, Crime^No.777 ol 2015 was registered for the offences under Sections^{406, 420 and} 506 IPC and charge sheet was also filed and the same^{was taken} cognizance vide CC No.l 536 of 2015. However, lhe de^facto complainant was falsely roped in the said case by the^petitioner herein and hence, the de facto complainant and his^brother approached the High Court of Judicature seeking to^quashthe proceedings in the said CC by filing Crl P. No.7465 of 2016 and the High Court has allowed the said criminal^{petition and quashedthe} proceedings in CC No.1536 of 2015 against the de facto complainant herein and his brother with a finding that the complainant^thereinhas filed a false complaint. The^present complaint^{is filed by lhe de facto} complainant stating that the^{petitioner herein has filed a false} complaint against him and his^{brotheronly to harassthem and to} insult them and also tarnish their^{image in the Society as they belong} to SC community.

¶36

Learned counsel for the^{petitioner has submitted that the} petitioner herein is not aware about the caste of lhe de facto complainant and has not intended to harm his reputation at any^time

¶37

ETD,J Crl.P. No.3278 of2023

¶38

J

¶39

He further has submitted that the petitioner herein has given an amount of Rs 65 00 lakhs out of friendship to one N. Ganesh, owner of Ganesh l\ilarbles, as he asked for his necessity and that the petitroner herein has borrowed the said money from others and facilitated the loan to said N.Ganesh and said Ganesh has kept certain house documents with him as security and that on one day, Ganesh has asked the documents on the pretext that he is ready to give away the money and accordingly, the petitioner has returned the documents, but said Ganesh failed to repay the money and further has threatened the petitioner herein stating that if he asks for money, he would file a case under SC and ST Act against him. With the said allegations, he has lodged a complaint, which was registered as FIR No 777 of 2015 against the de facto complainant herein and his brother for the offences under Sections 406,420,506 of lpC and the same was taken cognizance vide CC No.1536 of 2015. Thereafter, the de facto complainant and his brother have approached the High Court of Judicature vrde Crl.p. No.7465 of 20.16 and the same was allowed by this Court quashing the proceedings against the de facto complainant herein and his brother observing that the matter is purely of civil nature i e. with regard to recovery of money. Now, the present complaint is filed by the brother of Ganesh against the petitioner herein alleging that a farse case has been foisted against him with an

¶40

ETO.J Crl.P. No.3278 of 2023

¶41

4

¶42

intention to cause loss to his reputation as he belongs to a marginalized community

¶43

Learned counsel has further submitted that the^proceedings in the earlier case against lhe de facto complainant are^quashed vide Crl.P. No.7465 of 2016, holding that the matter is^purely of civil nature. Thus, the present complaint is filed by the de facto complainant herein, who is^petitioner in Crl.P. No.7465 of^2016, alleging that a false case is filed against them^{and the complaint is} aimed at causing loss to their reputation since^he belongs^{to SC/ST} Community and that they were being falsely implicated^{in that case.} Learned counsel has further submitted that the^{allegationthatthe} petitioner herein has filed the earlier complaint on the^ground of caste, is utterly false and therefore,^prayed to^{quash the proceedings against} the petitioner.

¶44

Learned counsel for the respondent^{No.2-de facto} complainant has submitted that the de facto^{complainantwas} humiliated by filing a false case^{by the petitionerherein and that he} has lost his reputation in the society and that^{just to annoythem and} insult them, the earlier complaint has been filed^{and hence'the} offence falls squarely under Section 3^{(1) (p) & (q) of SC and ST Act} and hence,^prayed to dismiss the^petition.

¶45

'"/'

¶46

)

¶47

EfD,J C .P. No.3278 ot 2023

¶48

7 . Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted to pass

¶49

appropriate orders in the petition

¶50

B. Perused the record

¶51

A perusal of the record discloses that the question revolves around filing of complaint in FIR No.777 of 2015 against lhe de facto complainant herein. lt is alleged in the present complaint that the petrtioner has filed the earlier complaint (in FIR No7l7 of 2015) falsely against the de faclo complainant and his brother stating that his brother borrowed an amount of Rs.65.00 lakhs from him and he failed to repay and that due to the said complaint, they were insulted and humiliated. The present complaint is registered as Crime No.361 of 2018. After investigation, the police filed the charge sheet, which is numbered as SC No 10 O of 2O2O for the offences under Sections 3(1 Xp)(r) of SC & ST Act For the sake of reference. the said Section is extracted hereunder:

¶52

"Section 3: Punishments for offences of atrocities:_

¶53

(1 ) Whoe,/er, not berng a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Schedu led Tnbe -

¶54

(a) xxxx to (o) xxxx

¶55

(p) rnstrtutes false. malicrous or vexatiouS suit or cflminal or other legal proceedings agarnst a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe,

¶56

(q) xxxx,

¶57

un-ts. No,Jztd ot zolJ

¶58

(0 intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a Schedulgd Caste or a Scheduted Tribe in any place within public view,"

¶59

10 The contention of petitioner is that lodging a complaint does not amount to loss of reputation. That the complaint registered under FIR No.777 of 2015 was quashed by the High Court not for the reason that it is a false complaint, but for the reason that the matter is civil in nature, the proceedings were quashed. The contention of the de facto complainant in this case is that a false complaint was lodged to humiliate them and to cause loss to their reputation. The prosecution also recorded the statements of official witnesses, who investigated and filed the final reporl in the earlier case. The veracity of these witnesses and the truth or otherwise in the allegations can be culled out only after a full-fledged trial.

¶60

'1 1. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of dispensing with the attendance of the petitioner before the trial court provided he is represented by a counsel before the trial court on every date of hearing and shall be present before the trial court as and when his presence is required.

¶61

Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed .

¶62

SD/- N.CHANDRA SEKHAR^RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR 6

¶63

//TRUE COPY//

¶64

SECTION OFFICER

¶65

To, 't. The Special Judge for Trial of cases under Trial for SC & ST POA ACT Cases cum Vll ADJ Court Cyberabad^{at L.B.Nagar.}

¶66

2 The XXth Metropolitan^{Magistrate, Cyberabad At Malkaigiri'}

¶67

The Station House Officer. Kusaiguda Police Station, Cyberabad District. 4. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad tourl

¶68