Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Telangana High Court

Sande Venkatramulu vs The State Of Telangana on 26 June, 2025

      THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA


          CRIMINAL PETITION No.6632 of 2025


ORAL ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking the Court to quash the order dated 09.05.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.130 of 2025 in Crime No.10 of 2025 by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Narayanpet.

2. The brief facts of the case are that in Crime No.10 of 2025 of Makthal Police filed a petition seeking permission to subject the accused to a potency test at the District Headquarters Hospital, Narayanpet, in connection with an offence registered under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The prosecution alleged that on 26-08- 2024, the accused provided an intoxicated cool drink to the complainant, who was working at Srinidhi Society, and subsequently raped her forcibly in a field after threatening her. On the other hand, the accused filed counter affidavit, asserting that the complainant had previously lodged multiple criminal cases against him and that the current complaint was a retaliatory action intended to counter such proceedings. 2

SKS,J Crl.P.No.6632 of 2025 It was also noted that this Court had granted anticipatory bail to the accused in Crl.P.No.768 of 2025, with directions to cooperate with the investigation. After hearing both sides and acknowledging the lack of representation from the accused during the hearing, the trial Court held that the potency test was a relevant factor in the investigation and that no prejudice would be caused to the accused by undergoing the test. Accordingly, the trial Court allowed the petition, directing the accused to appear for the potency test and instructed the police authorities to facilitate his production before the concerned hospital. Aggrieved thereby, the present criminal petition is filed.

3. Heard Mrs. Mogili Anaveni, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Mr. M. Vivekananda Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent

- State.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that although the trial Court recorded that it had "heard both sides" on the date of hearing, the accused was, in fact, not heard, as it is noted in the order that there was no 3 SKS,J Crl.P.No.6632 of 2025 representation on behalf of the accused. Without affording an opportunity to the accused to be heard, the petition was allowed, which caused prejudice to him. Therefore, he prayed the Court to set aside the order of the trial Court and remand the matter to the trial Court with a direction to provide an opportunity to the accused to present his case.

5. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that the accused had already filed a counter affidavit stating his objections. Hence, the trial Court, after considering the same, rightly disposed of the petition by granting permission for the potency test. Therefore, there is no need to interfere with the order of the trial Court, and the criminal petition is liable to be dismissed.

6. In light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and upon perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the accused was not granted an opportunity to be heard at the time, and the trial Court permitted the prosecution to subject him to a potency test. Therefore, this Court deems it fit to grant an opportunity to present his case. 4

SKS,J Crl.P.No.6632 of 2025

7. In view of the above, this Criminal Petition is allowed setting aside the order dated 09.05.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.130 of 2025 in Crime No.10 of 2025 by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Narayanpet. Further, the matter is remanded to the trial Court with a direction to afford an opportunity to both parties to present their submissions, and thereafter, to decide the petition on merits in accordance with law.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.

______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 26.06.2025 SAI 5 SKS,J Crl.P.No.6632 of 2025 67 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.6632 of 2025 Date: 26.06.2025 SAI