T. Narender Singh Bisain Vs The State of Telangana

¶1

1341,1,1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETIT]ON Nos: 6258 and 280oF 2 23

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6258 OF 2023 Between:

¶8

M/s.Kshatriya Rajput Trust Board, Represented by its Chairman Sri T. Narender Singh Besain

¶9

... Petitioner/Defacto4omplai nant

¶10

AND

¶11

'1. The State of Telengana, through public prosecutor For the high court of Telengana

¶12

...Respondent No.1 /Complainant

¶13

Mr. B.Mohan Singh, S/o.Late B.Sithal Singh, Age: 54 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.No.3-13-1 19/A, Srinivasapuram Colony, Ramanthapur, Hyderabad - 13.

¶14

t\Ir.M. Ajeeth Singh, S/o.Babu Hem Singh, Age: 55 years, Occ: Business, R/o.3- 1 -665, Nimboliadda, Kachiguda, Hyderabad-27.

¶15

Mr.B.Tikaram, S/o.LateB.Sithal Singh, Age: 59 years, Occ: Business, R/o. H. No. 3-1 -405, Nimboliadda, Kachiguda, Hyderabad-27 .

¶16

Smt.P. Sree Devi, Wo.P.Devender, Age: 44 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.No.2-1-45, Nallakunta, Hyderabad-44.

¶17

Mr.R.S.Chandramouli, S/o.Late R.S.Sharma, Age: 57^years, Rl/o.Plot No: 134, Road No:4, Venkataramana Colony, Nagole, Hyderabad.

¶18

...Respondent Nos. 26/Accused

¶19

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 set aside the order dated 19.3.2021 passed in Crl.M.P No. 1022 ot 202'l in Crime No.4212019 by the Xll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate restoring the Protest Petition for disposal in accordance with the law in the interest of^justice.

¶20

l.A. NO:1OF 2026

¶21

Petition under Section 482 ot cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be preased to reopen the present petition further arguments, in the interest of justice.

¶22

This Pertition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of^{(lriminar petition} and upon hearing the arguments of sri Enuganti sudhanshu R,ao, Advocate for the petitioners and, sri Jithender Rao Veeramaila, the Additional Putrric Prosecutor on beharf of the Respondent No. 1 and of Sri Dharmesh D.K. Jaiswal ldvocate for the Respondent No. 2.

¶23

CRIMINA L PE:TITION NO:6280 0F 2023

¶24

Between:

¶25

T .Narender Singh Bisain, S/o.. B_ajrang Singh Bisain, Age: 62 years Occ: Chairman of Kshatriva Rajpur rrust Board, Rlo. n. ruo.-r+-r-szo)rz] tur"ng'argh"t, ivir"1ii"i.

¶26

AND

¶27

...petitionerrDe_Facto Complainant

¶28

1 . The. State of Telangana, Through public prosecutor, High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad

¶29

...RespondenUcomplaanant

¶30

Mr. B.Mohan Singh, S/o.LateB.Sithal Singh, Age: 54 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.N..3-13-1.tg/A, Srinivasapuram Co6ny, Rlmanthapur, HVAeraO"O _ f S.

¶31

3 {rrM.^l1e9th Singh, SlgrBafy Hem Singh, Age.55 years, occ.Business, R/o .3-1 -665, Nimbotiadda, Kachiguda, Hya6ra1al_21.

¶32

Mr.B.Tikaram, S/o.LateB Sithal Singh, Age: 59 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H

¶33

. No 3-1 -40S, Nimbotiadda, Kachiguda, iyaeraOZa-Zl.

¶34

1. Smt.P. lSree Devi, Wo.p.Devender, Age: 44 years, Occ: Business, R/o. H. No. 2-1 -45, Nailakunta, Hyderabad_44l

¶35

Mr.R.S.Chandramouli. S/o.Late.R.S.Sharma, Age: E7 years, R/o.plot No.134, Road No.4, Venkataramana Colony, Nagote,' HfOeraOaO.

¶36

...Respondent Nos.2{/Accused

¶37

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances^stated in the lVlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court^may be^pleased to set-aside the order dated 1.5.2021^passed in R.C.No.2Ol2021 in Crime^No. 42t2019 by the Xll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad^{in the} interest of^justice .

¶38

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2026

¶39

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 reopen the^{present petition} for further arguments,ⁱⁿ the^{interest of justice.}

¶40

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the^{Memorandum of} Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri^Enuganti Sudhanshu Rao, Advocate for the Petitioners and, Sri Jithender^{Rao Veeramalla, the} Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent^{No. 1 and of Sri Dharmesh} D.K. JaiswalAdvocate for the Respondent No. 2.

¶41

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶42

THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶43

THE HON'BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA

¶44

CRIMINAL PET TION Nos.6258 and 6280 of 2023

¶45

Oate:l2.02.2026

¶46

Betweeln:

¶47

M/s. Kshatriya Rajput Trust Board, ReP. b'7 its Chairman

¶48

.. Petitioner/de facto complainant

¶49

And

¶50

State of Telangana, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad and 5 others.

¶51

co MON ORDER:

¶52

Respondents

¶53

C;rl.P.No.62S8 ot 2023 is filed to set aside the order dated 19.03.2021 passed in Cd.M.p. No.1022 of 2021 in Crime No.42 of 2019 by the Xll Additional Chief Metropotitan Magistrate Hyderabad.

¶54

Crl.P.No.6280 of 2023 is filed to set aside the order dated 01.05.2021 passed in R.C. No.20 of 2021 in Crime No.42 of 2019 by the Xll r\dditional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Hyderabad.

¶55

3 Since both the petitions arising out of fl1e same crime and the parties are one and the same, both the petitions are disposed of by way of this common order.

¶56

T

¶57

EfD,J Crl.P. Nos.6258 & 62N) of 2O23

¶58

2

¶59

4- Heard sri E. sudhanshu Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Dharmesh D.K. Jaiswat, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

¶60

The grievance of the petitioner in cr{.p. No.62sg of 2023 is that the complainant filed a private complaint and the same was referred to police and registered as crime No.42 of 201g. The potice have filed a final report in the said crime stating that there is 'tack of evidence'. Aggrieved by the same, the complainant has filed a protest petition vide crl.M.P. No.1022 of 2021 and the same was dismissed for default on 19.03.2021.

¶61

ln Crl.P.No.6280 of 2023, the grievance of the petitioner is that in crime No.42 of 2019, the police have filed a final report stating in"t tn"r" is 'tack of evidence', and the same was numbered as R.C. No.20 of 2021. The learned Magistrate has accepted the said R.C., and directed to issue proceedings accordingly vide order dated 01.05.2021.

¶62

Aggrieved by the said orders passed by the learned Magistrate, the complainant has filed the present petitions seeking to set aside the same

¶63

r(

¶64

-/

¶65

ETD,J Crt.P. Nos.6258 & 62EO oI 2023

¶66

3

¶67

B. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the protest petition has to be decided on merits, but cannot be dismissed for default and that the grievance of the petitioner would not be addressed when it is dismissed for default. He further has submitted that muc,h prejudice is caused to the petitioner as he went unheard in the probst petition. ln the first instance he was aggrieved by the inaction^,)f the police as they have filed the final report stating there is lack of r-'vidence and when he approached the court through the protest petition, the trial court ought not to have dismissed it for default arrd apart from that, the trial court has accepted the final report by obse''ving that the protest petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed for default and hence, the final report was accepted and registered as RC No.20 of 2021. He therefore, prayed to remand the matter to the trial court with a direction to dispose of the Criminal Mp No.1022 of 2021 on merits and also to set aside the docket order dated 01 .,35.2021passed in R.C. No.20 of 2021.

¶68

l-earned counsel for the respondent No.2 has submitted that the complaint itself is false and frivolous and that inspite of thorough invesligation, the police could not collect any evidence and thus, have rightly filerJ the final report stating the same. However, the petitioner htr\fled C:rl.M.P. No.1022 of 2021 expressing his protest, but he was called absent on two occasions and that on third occasion also, he

¶69

7

¶70

4

¶71

ETD,J Crl.P. Nos.6258 & 6280 of 2023

¶72

was called absent, and that as there was no representation till 4.00 PM on behalf of the protest petitioner, the trial court has righfly dismissed the petition for default. Even if it is remanded and even if it has to be decided on merits, the petition does not merit for consideration as it is based on a false complaint. He therefore, prayed to dismiss the petition.

¶73

Perused the record

¶74

The record disctoses that crime No.42 of 2o1g was registered based on the compraint given by the petitioner herein for the offences under sections 4gg and 500 lpc, whereunder it was held that the accused have misused the funds of the Kshatriya Rajput Trust and misappropriated the same and committed several irregularities in the trust. The case was investigated by the police and the police have filed a report stating that there is^,lack of evidence'. Thus, the de facto comptainant has filed the present petition vide cr].M.P.1022 of 2021 and it was called on 1 6.11.2020 and adjourned to 17.02.2021. on 12.02.2021, the petitioner was called absent and there was no representation and hence, it was posted to 1g.02.2021. The docket orders in crl.M.p. No.1022 of 2021 are extracted hereunder:

¶75

*_?

¶76

/ I

¶77

ETD,J Crl.P. Nos.6258 & 6280 of²⁰²³

5

7 II I II I

"Dated : 16.11.2020

Call on 17.02.2021

Dated : 17.02.2021

Called absent. No representation. Call on 19.03.2021

¶84

Dated : 19.03.2021

¶85

Petitioner is called absent. No representation,^waited till 4 PM. Hence,^petition dismissed^for default.'

¶86

ln the meantime, the^police filed the final report before^the

¶87

court and as the protest^petition is dismissed as default,^{the trial court} accepted the same and numbered as RC No.20 of^{2021 and directed} to issue proceedings accordingly. The docket orders in R.C.^No.20of 2021 are r>xtracted hereunder:

¶88

"Dated : 25.09.2020

¶89

lssue notice to complainant. Call on 14.O2.2021.

¶90

Dated : 14.02.2O21

¶91

Notice to def-complainant. Call on 15.04.2021.

¶92

Dated : 15.04.2021

¶93

PO is on EL. Call on 01.05.2021.

¶94

Dated :01.05.2021

¶95

\ -r

¶96

Perused the record. The^{protest petition} filed^{by the} def-complainant vide SR No.1298/2020^was dismissed for default on^{19.03.2021.Hence} this^final report is accepted and registered as RC No.20 of 2021 and issue^proceeding accordingly^"

¶97

}t

¶98

ETD,J Crl.P. Nos.6258 & 6280 of 2023

¶99

6

¶100

Thus, no opportunity was given to the petitioner to be heard in both the matters. once a protest petition is filed by the petitioner with his grlevance against the final report, the said grievance has to be addressed by the concerned court by hearing both sides. lf the petitioner is not heard and the petition is dismissed for default, the very purpose of filing the criminal Mp gets defeated. ln the present case, just because the petitioner was called absent on two occasions, the petition was dismissed for default and that the trial court has accepted the final report filed by the police and directed to proceed accordingly as the protest petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed. A cumulative perusal of both the orders impugned in crl.p. No.6258 and 6280 of 2023, it is made to understand that the trial court on dismissing the protest petition for default, went ahead in accepting the final report. Thus, the de facto complainant is aggrieved by both the orders. The protest petition ought not to have been dismissed for default and further just because it is not on the file, the trial court has accepted the final report. Therefore, to meet the ends of^justice, it is deemed appropriate to allow both the petitions by setting aside the impugned orders and to remand the matter to the trial court to dispose of the sante on merits, after hearing both sides.

¶101

f

¶102

I! I

¶103

EfD,J Ctl.P. Nos.6258 & 6280 o12023

¶104

7

¶105

.,

¶106

1/,-. Accordingly, both the criminal petitions are allowed setting aside tho order dated 19 03.2021 passed in Crl.M.P. No.1022 of 2021 in Crimr: No.42 of 2019 by the Xll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Hyderabad and order dated 01 .05.2021 passed in R.C. No.20 o'2021 in Crime No.42 of 2019 by the Xll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Hyderabad. Both the matters are remanded to the triirl court to consider and decide the same afresh on their own merits without being influenced by any of the observations made by this Court.

¶107

Mi:scellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶108

//TRUE COPY//

¶109

SD'- P.PONNA KRISHNA ASSISTANT RE]GISTRAR /o SECT]I'TI OFFICER ./

¶110

To,

¶111