Telangana High Court
Kalvakuntla Taraka Rama Rao vs The State Of Telangana on 9 September, 2025
Author: K. Lakshman
Bench: K. Lakshman
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN CRIMINAL PETITION Nos. 8965, 8966 and 8989 of 2025 COMMON ORDER:
Heard Mr.T.V.Ramana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Syed Yasar Mamoon, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1 - State.
2. Criminal Petition No.8965 of 2025 is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.2 in Crime No.85 of 2025, pending on the file of Nakrekal Police Station. The offences alleged against him are under Sections 353(1)(c) and 353(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNS, 2023').
3. Criminal Petition No.8966 of 2025 is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.3 in Crime No.86 of 2 2025, pending on the file of Nakrekal Police Station. The offences alleged against him are under Sections 353(1)(c) and 353(2) of BNS, 2023.
4. Criminal Petition No.8989 of 2025 is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.1 in Crime No.87 of 2025, pending on the file of Nakrekal Police Station. The offences alleged against him are under Sections 353(1)(c) and 353(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1)(u) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
5. Petitioner in all the aforesaid three Criminal Petitions is one and the same. Crime No.85 of 2025 was registered on the complaint lodged by Municipal Chairperson, Nakrekal Municipality. Crime No.86 of 2025 was registered on the complaint lodged by Congress Party worker. Crime No.87 of 2025 was registered on the 3 complaint lodged by the Director, PACS, Marruru, Nakrekal Mandal.
6. In all the aforesaid complaints, allegation leveled against the petitioner herein is that he has posted a message in Twitter and it is relevant to extract the said message:
Petitioner filed these criminal petitions to quash the proceedings in the aforesaid crimes.
7. Mr.T.V.Ramana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner never posted the said message in the Twitter as alleged by 4 the complainants in the aforesaid three crimes. Assuming for a moment, if the said message is posted by the petitioner, the contents of the said message lacks the ingredients of Sections 353(1)(c) and 353(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1)(u) of the Act, 1989. Petitioner was falsely implicated in the aforesaid three crimes due to political rivalry. With regard to one incident, Police, Nakirekal Police Station, have registered the aforesaid three crimes. Registration of multiple crimes on the basis of one incident is nothing but an abuse of process of law.
8. In the light of the said submissions, it is apt to note that Section 353 of BNS, 2023 deals with statements conducing to public mischief and Section 3(1)(u) of Act, 1989 deals with punishments for offences attrocities and it is relevant to extract the same below:
"353. Statements conducing to public mischief.--(1) Whoever makes, publishes or circulates any statement, false information, 5 rumour, or report, including through electronic means--
(a) with intent to cause, or which is likely to cause, any officer, soldier, sailor or airman in the Army, Navy or Air Force of India to mutiny or otherwise disregard or fail in his duty as such; or
(b) with intent to cause, or which is likely to cause, fear or alarm to the public, or to any section of the public whereby any person may be induced to commit an offence against the State or against the public tranquillity; or
(c) with intent to incite, or which is likely to incite, any class or community of persons to commit any offence against any other class or community, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.
(2) Whoever makes, publishes or circulates any statement or report containing false information, rumour or alarming news, including through electronic means, with intent to create or promote, or which is likely to create or promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.6
(3) Whoever commits an offence specified in sub-
section (2) in any place of worship or in any assembly engaged in the performance of religious worship or religious ceremonies, shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to five years and shall also be liable to fine. Exception.--It does not amount to an offence, within the meaning of this section, when the person making, publishing or circulating any such statement, false information, rumour or report, has reasonable grounds for believing that such statement, false information, rumour or report is true and makes, publishes or circulates it in good faith and without any such intent as aforesaid.
3. Punishments for offences atrocities.--3 [(1) Whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe,--
xxx (u) by words either written or spoken or by signs or by visible representation or otherwise promotes or attempts to promote feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will against members of the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes;
xxx"
9. To attract the offence under Section 353(1)(c) of BNS, 2023, there should be an intention to cause or which 7 is likely to cause any officer, soldier, sailor or airman in the Army, Navy or Air Force of India to mutiny or otherwise disregard or fail in his duty as such, there should be an intention to cause, or which is likely to cause, fear or alarm to the public, or to any section of the public whereby any person may be induced to commit an offence against the State or against the public tranquility and there should be an intention incite, or which is likely to incite, any class or community of persons to commit any offence against any other class or community.
10. To attract the offence under Section 353(2) of BNS, 2023, there should be publishing or circulating any statement or report containing false information, rumour or alarming news, including through electronic means, with an intention to create or promote, or which is likely to create or promote, on grounds of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, caste or community or any other ground whatsoever, feelings of enmity, hatred or ill 8 will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities.
11. To attract Section 3(1)(u) of Act, 1989, there should be words either written or spoken or by signs or by visible representation or otherwise promotes or attempts to promote feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will against members of the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes.
12. Coming to the facts of the present case, the allegation leveled against the petitioner in the aforesaid three crimes is that he posted the aforesaid message in Twitter.
13. With regard to the contention of the petitioner that he has not posted the said message in the twitter, it is a factual aspect which this Court can't consider. Assuming for a moment, the said message was posted by him in Twitter, as per the contents of the said message, the allegations leveled against the petitioner herein is that the congress leaders involved with private school management to send 9 the SSC 10th class examination first day question paper through whatsapp groups. While 15 people have been involved only 6 have been arrested. Right hand of the congress MLA is not named in the FIR with Government's pressure. Thus, there is no enmity, hatred or ill will between different religious, racial, language or regional groups or castes or communities.
14. As discussed supra, on the complaint lodged by Municipal Chairperson, Nakrekal Municipality, Police have registered Crime No.85 of 2025, on the complaint lodged by Sri Uggidi Srinivas, Congress Party worker, Police have registered Crime No.86 of 2025 and on the complaint lodged by Director, PACS, Marruru, Police have registered Crime No.87 of 2025. The allegation leveled against the petitioner in the aforesaid three crimes is that he posted the aforesaid message in Twitter. Thus, allegations, incident and cause of action are one and the same.10
15. With regard to one and the same cause of action, Police can't register multiple FIRs as held by the Apex Court in T.T.Antony v. State of Kerala 1 and this Court in Jakka Vinod Kumar Reddy v. State of Telangana 2.
16. Assuming for a moment that the petitioner has posted the aforesaid message in Twitter, the same is lacking ingredients of Sections 353(1)(c) and 353(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1)(u) of the Act, 1989. Therefore, continuation of proceedings in the aforesaid three crimes against the petitioner is an abuse of process of law. Therefore, the proceedings in the aforesaid three crimes against the petitioner are liable to be quashed.
17. In the result, proceedings in Crime Nos.85, 86 and 87 of 2025, pending on the file of the Nakrekal Police Station, are hereby quashed in respect of the petitioner herein only. 1 AIR 2001 SUPREME COURT 2637 2 AIRONLINE 2021 TEL 76 11
18. Accordingly, these Criminal Petitions are allowed.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
_______________ K. LAKSHMAN, J 9th SEPTEMBER, 2025.
Ynk