T. Anjanna v. Ajaran Jayanth Kumar
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 728 OF 2025 Between:
T. Anjanna, S/o Bhadraiah, Aged about 62 yedrs, Occ. Retired Tahsildar, Rl/o H.No.1 0-2-829, Vidya Nagar, Karim Nagar.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No. 2.
AND
1. Akaram Jayanth Kumar, S/o Bhaskar, Aged about 38 years, Occ Tahasildar, Ashok Nagar, Sircilla, Rajanna Siricialla.
2. The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad.
... RESPON DE NT/COM PLAI NANTS Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the l\ilemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call forthe records relating to Crime No. 18of 2O25, dated 11-012025, on the file of Thangallapalli Police Station, Rajanna Siricilla District, and quash the proceedings therein l.A. NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the fvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in Crime No. 18 of 2025, dated 11-01-2025, on the file of Thangallapalli Police Station, Rajanna Siricilla District, including arrest of the petitioner/Accused No.2. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri KATIKA RAVINDER REDDY, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri. M. Vivekananda Reddy the Assistant Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No. 2.
The Court made the following: ORDER
J
IN THE HIGH COURT F'OR TIIE STATE OF TE
GANA AT HYDERABAD TI]IE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.728 Date:3I.12. 2025 Betwr:en:
T.Anj;mna S/o Bhadraiah Petitioners AND Akararn Jayanth Kumar and another
...Respondents
ORDER
'this criminal Petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.l 8 of 2025 on the file of Thangaltapalli Police Station, Rajanna Sircilla District, wherein the petitioner was an?yed as accused No. 2 for the offences punishable under Sections 120-8, 420,467, 471and 409 r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, "[pC,').
2.
Eleard Ms.K.Archana, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.vivekananda Reddy, learned Additional public Prosecutor, appearing for respondent No.2.
-'- -- ----'--=:Y-tY_!
r.Jty 7a
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the ,l respondent No.llde facto complainant, while discharging his official duties as Tahsildar, lodged the complaint against the petitioner by making false allegations. The petitioner has not created or forged any document. The nature of the allegations made in the complaint is purely civil in nature. The ingredients of the offences under Sections 409 and 467 of the IPC do not attract against the petitioner. The other offences levelled against the petitioner are punishable with imprisonment of less than seven years. The police registered the crime only with an intention to harass the petitioner at the instance of local political party pressure.
4.
He further submitted that based on similar complaints lodged by respondent No.1, Crime No.79 of 2O2l was registered for the very same offences against the petitioner, who was arrayed as accused No.2 in the said crime. The petitioner * approached this Court by filing Crl.P. No.3017 of '2025, and this court, by order dated 01.05.2025, disposed of the said criminal Petition directing the Investigating Officer to proceed with the investigation and not to take any coercive steps against the
petitioner. In the present case also, very same allegations are levell,:d against the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is entitle'd to the very same relief which was granted by this Court in Crl P. No.3017 of 2025.
5.
Learned Additional Public prosecutor has not disputed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6.
'raking into consideration the above submissions, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, the Investigating office.r is directed to conclude the investigation in crime No.lg of 202.5. The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation and produce the documents which are in his possession. The Investigating officer is further directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner.
7 - \vith the above directions, the criminal petition is dispose'd of.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if ony, shall stand closed.
Sd/. U. SUDHA ASSISTANT REGTSTRAR //TRUE COPY/ To,
1. The ll Add itional Judicial Magistrate of First Ctass at Sircilla, Rajanna Sircilta District.
2. TheSHOTha
3. The Tahsildar lapalli pelice Station nna. S iricilla District.
a urrrcilla District.
Aovocate [OPt,nt Gta-..
n
4. One_CC to SRl,
--7 5' Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court for the btate oi Tetangana _ at Hyderabad IOUTI
6. Two CD Copies.
,//'
///'
PzuBA )@_ \ t 'r r6HJ.vj'-.*;@83
,/ I HIGH COI.JRT DATED i31111212025 I STN.?
0 6 ttB 202[ o I jr'
* \ I ,.::
I CRLP.No.'728 of 2025 :ii I t \ CRIMINAL ]'EITITION IS DISPOSED.
lKs ts|l>e N .cIIt