CRLP/5449/2025 of Kotha Tharun Kumar Vs The State or Telangana on 23 March 2026

ORDER:

' This Criminal Petition is filed seeking to call for the records pertaining to the impugned charge sheet in C.C.No.66 of 2025 of learned Special Judge for Social Welfare Scam Court at Hyderabad, for the offence under Section 447 of IPC and Section 3 of PDPP Act as filed by the police based on the complaint of the 2'd respondent in FIR.No. Ll49 of 2023 and same may be quashed by exercising jurisdiction under Section 528. of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Act, 2O23 as against the petitioner and pass such other order or orders which are necessary in the interest ofjustice.

NBKJ crlp_5449 2025

2. Ht:ard Sri M.Damodar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Dr.Surepalli Prashanth, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for respondent No.l - State and Sri Ch.Buchi Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for Telangana Housing Board, for respondr:nt No.2. Perused the record.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner purchased Plot No.12 in Sy.No.67 through a registered sale deed dated 29.12.2022. T}.:^e vendor had earlier obtained permission from the GramparLchayat in the year 2016 and subsequently secured regulariz;rtion from HMDA in the yeat 202L after a sun/ey confirmed that the plot is situated in Sy.No.67. Based on the same, the petitioner obtained construction permission dated 15.05.2023. During the course of construction, the 2"d respondent attempted to interfere and stop the construction, upon which the petitioner approached this court and obtained an interin"r order in w.P.No.1r)166 of 2023, dated 15.06.2023. Thereafter, the petitioner completerl the construction and is presently residing in the said house along with his family. It is stated that the 2.d. respondent (Housing Board) is concerned only with land in sy.No.66 and has no right over any part of the land in sy.No.67. Therefore, a false case of trespass has been foisted against the petitioner, and the police, without conducting proper investigation, have filed the impugned charge sheet. Despite the pendency of the civil/administrative ,:'

NBKJ crlp_5449 2025 dispute, the police registered FIR No.lL49/2O23 and filed a charge sheet in C.C.No.66l2025 for the offences under Section 447 IPC and Section 3 of the PDPP Act.

4. The main grievance of the petitioner is that his property is situated. in Sy.No.67 and. not in Sy.No.66 of the 2.d respondent. It is contend.ed that the issue pertains to alleged encroachment, which is civil in nature and is already pending adjudication before the competent authority. It is further contended that the police failed to conduct a proper enquiry and did not consider the petitioner's documents and reply submitted under Section 4l-A Cr.P.C. Therefore, initiation of criminal proceedings prior to adjudication of the civil dispute is arbitrar5r and amounts to abuse of process of law.

5. Learned Standing Counsel for Telangana Housing Board for respondent No.2 submits that M/s. Deccan lnfrastructure & Land Holdings Ltd. (DILL), a subsidiary of the A.P.Housing Board is the absolute owner and possessor of Ac.58-0O Gts. (actual Ac.58.24 Gts.) in Sy.No.66, having acquired the sarne through a registered sale deed dated L2-O1.20O8 after the Government alienated the land to the Housing Board in 2OO7.The petitioner, though claiming ownership of Plot No. 12 in Sy.No.67, was found on 02.O5 .2023 to be undertaking construction and borewell activit5r by encroaching into DILL's land in, Sy.No.66. A survey conducted by the Mandal Surveyor on

NBK"J crlp_5449 2025 O8.O6.2C23 confirmed that the petitioner's constmction falls partly in Sy.No.66 (95 sq. yards) and partly in Sy.No.67 (63.67 sq. yards), thereby ,:stablishing encroachment into DILL land. [t is contended that pennissions obtained by the petitioner relate only to Sy.No.67 and do not authorize occupation of Sy.No.66, and that civil proceedings do not bar criminal liability for trespass. It is further stated that the petitioner suppressed material facts, including the survey n:port, and continued construction despite knowledge of encroachrnent, and' therefore submits that the police, after due enquiry, have rightly filed the charge sheet and the petition is tiabte to be disnrissed.

6. Considering the submissions made by both learned counsel, this Courl finds that the Mandal Surveyor's report dated 08.06.2023 indicates that part of the petitioner's construction (95 sq. yards) encroaches upon DILL's land in Sy.No.66, whereas the petitioner owns only Pl.ot No.12 in sy.No.67. Therefore, this court is of the opinion that the matter concerns land boundaries and ownership, which constitute primarily a civil/administrative dispute, and the petitioner should approach the competent civil authorit5r for adjudicatic,n of rights and possession. i t,ll i: li I

NBKJ cdp_5449-i025

7. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. However, petitioner is at liberty to approach the competent civil court for adjudication of rights. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed. ASSrs'^ffi?8f'Hffi //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFTCER

1. The special Judge for social welfare scam court at Hyderabad

2. The station House officer, police Station Medipally, Rachakonda

3. One CC to Sri M Damodar ReddyAdvocate tOpUCl 4' one CC to Sri Ch. Buchi Reddy, Standing Counsel for Telangana Housing Board [OPUC] 5' Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUToR High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad [OUT]

6. Two CD Copies ba \

To, \

HIGH COURT DATED: 2310312026

ORDER

25ilAHzffi s 0r) Ilri-.... ' ') 5T4r€ .>, * * CRLP.No.5449 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE CRIMINAL PETITION t I i I