MALA CHOUDHARY & ANR. versus STATE OF TELANGANA & ANR.

MALA CHOUDHARY & ANR. versus STATE OF TELANGANA & ANR.

The FIR and consequent proceedings were quashed because the material on record showed a drastic variance between the FIR and the civil plaint, no material disclosed any cognizable offence under Sections 406 or 420 IPC, the complaint had misused police machinery (influential complainant got FIR registered and caused arrest of a 70-year-old appellant), and the matter was essentially civil; accordingly, in exercise of Article 136 this Court set aside the High Court order and quashed the FIR and all proceedings as an abuse of process.

Parties
Appellant: Mala Choudhary; Appellant: Puttagunta Revathi Choudary; Respondent: State of Telangana; Respondent: Respondent No.2
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
18 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal No. 3052 of 2025 / Appeal Under Article 136 of the Constitution Against High Court Order Dated 28.04.2023 in CRLP No. 7869 of 2021 (quashing Petition Under Section 482 Cr PC Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Quashing of FIR, Section 482 Cr PC, Sections 406 and 420 IPC, Misuse of Police Investigation, Exemplary Costs, Police Protection, Specific Performance
Criminal Law Civil Law Constitutional Law Quashing of FIR Section 482 Cr PC Sections 406 and 420 IPC Misuse of Police Investigation Exemplary Costs +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mala Choudhary

Appellant

Puttagunta Revathi Choudary

Appellant

State of Telangana

Respondent

Respondent No.2

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal No. 3052 of 2025 / Appeal Under Article 136 of the Constitution Against High Court Order Dated 28.04.2023 in CRLP No. 7869 of 2021 (quashing Petition Under Section 482 Cr PC Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the FIR No. 771 of 2020 and consequential proceedings disclose any cognizable offence or are a gross abuse of the criminal process warranting quashing under Article 136/Section 482 CrPC
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the quashing petition in a cryptic manner without addressing merits
  3. 3 Whether exemplary costs and protective measures are warranted where a complainant with influence misuses criminal process in a dispute of purely civil nature

Ratio Decidendi

The FIR and consequent proceedings were quashed because the material on record showed a drastic variance between the FIR and the civil plaint, no material disclosed any cognizable offence under Sections 406 or 420 IPC, the complaint had misused police machinery (influential complainant got FIR registered and caused arrest of a 70-year-old appellant), and the matter was essentially civil; accordingly, in exercise of Article 136 this Court set aside the High Court order and quashed the FIR and all proceedings as an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned High Court order dated 28.04.2023 in CRLP No. 7869 of 2021 set aside
  • FIR No. 771 of 2020 dated 14.12.2020 and all proceedings consequent thereto quashed and set aside as gross abuse of process of law