Telangana High Court
CRLP/17448/2025 of Sri. Pothuganti Venkataiah Vs The State of Telangana on 31 December 2025
Pothuganti Venkataiah, S/o. Occ:Agriculture, R/o.Boddugudem Bhongiri District. 134441 Late P.Shivaiah, Aged about: 64 years, Village, Addaguduru Mandal, Yadadri- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE 2. Ms
Between:
1 . Sri. Pothuganti Venkataiah, S/o.
Occ:Agriculture, R/o.Boddugudem
Bhongiri District.
134441
Late P.Shivaiah, Aged about: 64 years,
Village, Addaguduru Mandal, Yadadri-
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
2. Ms Pothuganti Mangamma, Dlo. P. Venkataiah, Aged about: 41 years, Occ:
Agriculture, R/o.Boddugudem Village, Addaguduru lvlandal, Yadadri-Bhongiri District.
...Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2
AND
The State of Telangana, through P.S. Addaguduru, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana State.
... Res po nde nUCom pla inant
Sri. Pothuganti Yadamma, Wo.Late. P.Raju, Aged about: .53 years, Occ:
Agriculture, R/o.Boddugudem Village, Addaguduru Mandal, Yadadri-Bhongiri District.
...RespondenUDe-facto Complainant
Petition under Section 528 of the BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to QUASH the all proceedings in .(Charge Sheet) C.C.No. 862 of 2022, uls. 447, 427, rlw 34 of lPC, on the file of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Ramannapet proceedings, only to the extent of the petitioners have absolute title and they are not the strangers to Respondent No,2 to prevent abuse of process of law otherwise the petitioners will suffer irreparable loss and status which cannot compensated at any cost, the dispute was purely civil in nature already civil case is running vide O.S.No.277 o'f 2022 on the file of Prl.junior Civil Judge, Yadadri-Bhongiri District, at Ramannapet in the nature which was given the colour of a criminal offence by creating of Respondent No.2.
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 17448 OF 2025
'
l.A. NO: 2 OF 2025
Petition under Section 528 of the BNSS 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 appearance against the Petitioner/ Accused Nos.'l & 2 in connection C.C.No.B62 ot 2022 on the file of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Yadadri-Bhongiri District, at Ramannapet pending disposal of above criminal petition.
This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Royyala Thirupathaiah, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1-State and None appeared for Respondent No.2.
The Court made the following: ORDER
I
l
I
rl
ll
-----
I
I
I
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
CRIMINAL PETITION No.17448 ot 2025
DATED ;31.12.2025
Between:
Sri Pothuganti Venkataiah and another
... Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 & 2
AND
The State of Telangana,
Through P.S. Addaguduru,
Rep., by its Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Telangana State and another
...Respondents
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS') by the petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 seeking to quash the proceedings against them, in C.C.No.B62 of 2022 on the file of learned Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramannapet, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 447
and 427 r/w.34 of lPC.
2.
Heard Mr. Royyala Thirupathaiah, learned counsel for the pgtitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional 'l Ptblic Propecutor for the respondent No.1-State.
.E
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
:: ORDER::
I i
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not committed any offence of trespass and that they are the owners of the subject land and thus, the allegation that they are entering into their own land, does not amount to trespass. He further submitted that the de facto complainant has no knowledge about the location of the property and has raised false allegation against them. He further submitted that the petitioners filed a suit vide O.S.No.2 77 of 2O22seeking perpetual lnjunction and that it is pending. That the present case is filed to give a criminal colour to the civil dispute, he, therefore, prayed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.862 of 2022.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioners themselves have filed a suit for identification of the property and thus, they themselves are not sure about the location of the property. He further submitted that the Prosecution recorded the statements of eye witnesses during the course of investigation, which needs to be tested during the course of trial and therefore, he prayed this Court to dismiss the petition.
5. Perused the record. I
6. The contents of the complaint and the recitals of charge sheet point out the allegations for the offences under Sections 447 and 427 rlw 34 of IPC against the petitioners herein. The record further discloses that a civil dispute IS pending between the parties with regard to the subject land. LWs-3 and 4 are listed as eye-witnesses.
7. Therefore, the veracity in the statement of the witnesses and also the truth or otherwise of the allegations can be culled out only after a full-fledged trial. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to dispense with the presen@ of the petitioners before the trial Court.
8. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is disposed of dispensing with the presence of the petitioners before the trial court provided that they are represented by a counsel before the trial court on every date of hearing and shall appear before the trial court whenever their presence is required during the course of trial. us Petitions peMing, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- K. BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER
1. The Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, At Ramannapet
2. The Station House Officer, Addagudur Police Station, Rachakonda District
3. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hvderabad. [OUTI Or*d.. To, I I ll I
a. Oire CC to Sri. R6yyala Thirupathaiah, Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CD Copies GNK/PSL I
HIGH COURT DATED:3111212025 \
ORDER
CRLP.No.17448 of 2025 DISPOSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION \ J N:E qn[61a6 1 I FtB 202 *
( o() 1HE Sra * il @-