Dismissed¶39

Smt.Choti Bai v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC6 Feb 2026CRLP/8521/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quash petition (S.482 CrPC / S.528 BNSS) dismissed as infructuous — Crime No. 399 of 2024, Mangalhat Police Station, Hyderabad — offences under Ss. 448, 427, 506 r/w 34 IPC and S.175(3) BNSS — final report filed closing case as 'lack of evidence' before XVI Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate — petitioners Choti Bai, Laxman Singh Subedar, Rani Bai (Accused 1, 3 & 4) v. State of Telangana & Shanta Bai — Telangana High Court, N. Tukaramji, J., 06.02.2026 — CRLP No. 8521 of 2024 — no adjudication on merits; miscellaneous petitions closed.

What did the court decide?

As the prosecution has filed the final report closing the case as 'lack of evidence' and the crime itself has ended, nothing further remains in the criminal petition for consideration ¶38

Smt.Choti Bai Vs The State of Telangana — Telangana HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA // AT HYDERABAD

¶2

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

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTIGE N.TUKARAMJI

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO i852',1 OF 2024

¶6

Between:

¶7

SmtChoti Bai, Wo. Ashok Singh, Aged about 77 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o. H. No. 13-'l-5 19/4, Dilawar Gunj, Upper Dhootpet, Hydeiabad.

¶8

Laxman Singh Subedar, S/o G. Raiu Sinqh. Aqed about 35 vears. Occ. Business, R/o H.No.'14-10-111011 & 2, Lowe-r Dho6lpet, Hyderabai.

¶9

R-ani .9ai, D/o Prakash, Aged about 50 years, Occ. - Business, R/o H.No.14-11295, Mangalhat, Dhoolpet, Hyderabad.

¶10

...Petitioners/Accused -1,3&4

¶11

¶12

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

¶13

Smt. Shanta Bai, Wo. Late Arjun Singh, Aged about 75 years, Occ. Housewife, R/o. H. No. 13-1-'1067, Gandhi Baitak, Uppei Dhootpet, Hyderabad

¶14

...Respondents/Defacto - 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 against the petitioners/Accusecl 1, 3 & 4 in Crime. No. 399 of 2024 On the File Of^potice Station Mangathat Hyderabad, for the offences Under Sec. 448,427,sOG rlw 34 of tpc and Sec..l75(3) of BNSS Act, in the interest of justice.

¶16

t.A. NO: 2 OF 2024

¶17

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 including the appearance of the Petitioners/Accused 1, 3 & 4 in Crime. No. 399 ot 2024 On the File Of police Station Mangalhat Hyderabad, for the offences Under Sec. 448,427,506 rtw 34 of IPC and Sec.175(3) of BNSS Act, in the interest ofjustice

¶18

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Mr M A MUJEEB, Arivocate for the^petitioners and Mr E. GANESH, the Additional public Prosecutor rn beharf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No.2.

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

t :I i Ii I :i il I I

¶21

1 \

¶22

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA AT I TDERABAD}

¶23

THT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^N.TUKARAMJI

¶24

DATE : o,6.o.2.2o.26

¶25

Between:

¶26

Smt.Choti Bai and Others

¶27

...Petitioners-accused^{Nos.1' 3 & 4}

¶28

AND

¶29

The State of Telang€rna and^another

¶30

...ResPondents

¶31

ORDER:

¶32

This Criminal Petition is^{frled under Section 482 of the Code} of Criminal Procedure^{(for short 'Cr.P.C,l973lseeking quashment} of the proceedings against^{the petitioners-accusedNos-1,3 and 4} in crime No.399 of 2024^{on the file of Mangalhat Police station,} Hyderabad.

¶33

Heard learned. counsel^{for the petitioners and Mr.E.Ganesh,} learned Additional Public^{Prosecutorappearing for the respondent} No.1-State.

¶34

\I.-

¶35

)

¶36

The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos. 1,3 and 4 in Crime No.399 of 2024 for the offences under Section 44g,427, 506, r/w. Section 34 of IpC.

¶37

lear:ned Additional public prosecutor submitted that after due investigation, final report has been fired closing the matter as 'lack of evr.dence' on 22.rL.2024 before the learned XVI Additionar chief Metropolitan Magistrate. Hence, nothing further remains in this matter for deliberation and prays for dismissal of the petition.

¶38

Havirrg regard to the development, and as the prosecution has filed final report and the crime itself has ended, nothing further rerrrains in this petition for consideration.

¶39

6' Accordingly, this criminal petition is dismissed as infructuous.

¶40

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶41

Sd/- T.SRINIVASA REODY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶42

//TRUE COPY//

¶43

fo.

¶44

s CTION OFFICER