Telangana High Court
Mr. Tv Ramana Murthy vs The State Of Telangana on 22 July, 2026
Author: N.Tukaramji
Bench: N.Tukaramji
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
CRIMINAL PETITION No.1114 OF 2017
DATE: 22.07.2026
Between :
Mr TV Ramana Murthy and three others.
... Petitioners
AND
The State of Telangana, Rep by its Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of
Telangana and the State of A P at High Court Buildings
Premises, Hyderabad (SHO PS Gopalapuram L&O) and
another.
... Respondents.
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “CrPC“) seeking quashment of the
proceedings in F.I.R. No.304 of 2016 on the file of Gopalapuram Law &
Order Police Station, registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, “the
SC/ST Act”). The petitioners are arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 4 in the
said crime.
2
2. Heard Ms. G.V. Subrahmanyam, learned counsel for the
petitioners, and Mr. Mr. Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor, representing the respondent-State and Ms. G.V.
Bhagyalakshmi, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No.2.
3.1. The case of the complainant is that, owing to the neglect of her
husband, she had been living separately with her son and was earning
her livelihood through employment. She joined Janaharsha Group
Companies in the year 2011 as a Sales Executive in the Marketing
Department and was subsequently promoted to the posts of Sales
Officer and Sales Executive. It is alleged that the accused persons
illegally and without any justification terminated her services, abused
her in filthy language, attempted to assault her, and subjected her to
insults and humiliation during the course of her employment. The
complainant further alleged that the accused withheld her service
benefits amounting to approximately Rs.4,00,000.
3.2. It is further stated that, although she lodged a report before the
Gopalapuram Police Station, no action was taken. Claiming that she
belongs to a Scheduled Caste, she alleged that the acts of the accused
constituted offences of atrocity under the relevant provisions of the
SC/ST Act. She also alleged that the accused threatened her for
approaching the police and demanding her lawful service benefits.
Accordingly, she sought a detailed investigation into the allegations,
3
protection from the alleged threats, and enforcement of her legal rights.
Based on the said report, the present crime came to be registered.
4.1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the averments
in the FIR, on their face, disclose nothing more than an employment-
related dispute concerning the alleged non-payment of service
benefits, which has been given a criminal colour. It is contended that,
by no stretch of imagination, do the allegations in the complaint satisfy
the essential ingredients of the offences punishable under the SC/ST
Act. Learned counsel further submitted that, in her statement recorded
under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the second
respondent stated that the dispute had been amicably settled with the
intervention of the Assistant Commissioner of Police, pursuant to which
the management agreed to pay her pending service benefits, including
the balance amount of Rs.22,400/-. In view of the said settlement, she
categorically stated before the learned Magistrate that she was no
longer interested in prosecuting the complaint.
4.2. Learned counsel also contended that the very name of the de
facto complainant indicates that she professes Christianity, whereas in
the complaint she claimed to belong to a Scheduled Caste. In this
regard, reliance was placed upon Chinthada Anand v. State of Andhra
Pradesh, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 466, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme
Court held that the protection under the SC/ ST Act is available only to
4
a person who is legally recognised as a member of a Scheduled Caste
or Scheduled Tribe, and that a person who has converted to
Christianity or Islam cannot claim the benefit of Scheduled Caste status
merely on the basis of birth in a Scheduled Caste. On the strength of
the said decision, learned counsel prayed that this Court exercise its
inherent jurisdiction to quash the FIR and all consequential
proceedings.
5.1. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondent-State opposed the criminal petition and submitted that the
allegations contained in the complaint, read along with the statement of
the second respondent recorded under Section 164 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, prima facie disclose the commission of cognizable
offences, including offences punishable under the SC/ ST Act.
5.2. It was contended that the second respondent consistently
alleged that the petitioners had withheld her legitimate service benefits
and, when she demanded the same, abused her by referring to her
caste and attempted to use criminal force against her. The learned
Additional Public Prosecutor further submitted that the subsequent
settlement between the parties would not, by itself, justify quashing of
the criminal proceedings. According to him, the genuineness of the
settlement, as well as the applicability of the provisions of the SC/ST
Act, involve disputed questions of fact that require proper adjudication
5
during the course of investigation or trial. It was, therefore, contended
that quashing the proceedings at this stage would be premature and
may result in prejudice to the prosecution. Accordingly, he prayed for
dismissal of the criminal petition.
6. I have carefully considered the submissions and perused the
material available on record.
7. The record demonstrates that the genesis of the dispute
admittedly arose out of the employment of the de facto complainant
with Janaharsha Group of Companies and the alleged non-payment of
her service benefits. The grievance, in substance, pertains to the
termination of her services and the settlement of her employment dues.
Although the complaint contains allegations of abuse, intimidation, and
an attempt to assault her, the dispute, when viewed in its entirety,
appears to have emanated from a service-related disagreement
concerning the payment of her legitimate employment benefits. It is
also not in dispute that the said dispute was subsequently resolved
through the intervention of the Assistant Commissioner of Police.
8. A significant circumstance, which cannot be overlooked, is the
statement of the de facto complainant recorded under Section 164 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the said statement, she
categorically stated before the learned Magistrate that the dispute had
6
been amicably settled, that the management had agreed to pay her
pending service benefits, including the balance amount of Rs.22,400/-,
and that she was no longer interested in prosecuting the accused. A
voluntary statement made before a Judicial Magistrate carries
considerable evidentiary value for the limited purpose of examining
whether the continuation of the criminal proceedings would subserve
the ends of justice or merely result in an abuse of the process of the
Court.
9. It is well settled that the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to be exercised
sparingly, with circumspection, and only in appropriate cases.
However, where the allegations contained in the First Information
Report, even if accepted in their entirety, do not disclose the
commission of any cognizable offence or fail to satisfy the essential
ingredients of the offences alleged, or where the continuation of the
criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of the
Court, this Court would be justified in exercising its inherent jurisdiction
to secure the ends of justice.
10. The principles governing the exercise of such jurisdiction have
been authoritatively laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State
of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, wherein illustrative
categories were identified in which criminal proceedings may be
7
quashed. Among them are cases where the allegations, taken at their
face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute
any offence; where the allegations are so absurd and inherently
improbable that no prudent person could conclude that an offence has
been committed; or where the proceedings are manifestly attended
with mala fides or have been instituted with an ulterior motive for
wreaking vengeance or exerting undue pressure upon the accused.
11. It is true that the learned Additional Public Prosecutor contended
that the allegations contained in the complaint, read in conjunction with
the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., prima facie attract
the provisions of the SC/ST Act. However, a careful reading of the
complaint indicates that the alleged caste-based abuse is stated to
have occurred during the course of a dispute relating to the payment of
service benefits. In Hitesh Verma v. State of Uttarakhand, (2020) 10
SCC 710, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the provisions of the
SC/ST Act are not attracted merely because one of the parties belongs
to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe when the dispute essentially
pertains to civil, contractual, or personal rights, unless the statutory
ingredients of the offence are independently established. Likewise, in
Gorige Pentaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (2008) 12 SCC 531, it
was held that criminal proceedings under the Act cannot be sustained
in the absence of specific averments disclosing the essential
8
ingredients of the alleged offences. Although proceedings under the
SC/ST Act ordinarily cannot be quashed solely on the basis of a
compromise between the parties, where the foundational ingredients of
the alleged offences are absent, the dispute is essentially private in
nature, and the complainant has unequivocally expressed her
unwillingness to prosecute after an amicable settlement, such
circumstances constitute relevant considerations in determining
whether the continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to
an abuse of the process of law.
12. In the present case, the material on record clearly indicates that
the underlying employment dispute has been substantially resolved.
The de facto complainant has acknowledged the settlement before the
learned Magistrate and has unequivocally expressed that she is no
longer interested in prosecuting the accused. In the peculiar facts and
circumstances of the case, compelling the petitioners to undergo the
rigours of a criminal trial, despite the disappearance of the underlying
grievance and the absence of the foundational ingredients of the
offences alleged under the SC/ST Act, would serve no useful purpose
and would amount to an abuse of the process of the Court.
13. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court is satisfied that the present
case squarely falls within the parameters governing the exercise of
inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., as enunciated by the
9
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Bhajan Lal (supra). Accordingly, this Court
finds it to be a fit case for exercising its inherent powers to prevent
abuse of the process of the Court and to secure the ends of justice.
14. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Consequently, the
proceedings against the petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 4 in F.I.R.
No.304 of 2016 on the file of Gopalapuram Law & Order Police Station
are hereby quashed. Consequently, all pending miscellaneous
applications, if any, shall stand closed.
_______________
Date: 22.07.2026 N.TUKARAMJI, J
MRKR
