Telangana HC quashes SC, ST atrocities case against CM Revanth

Hyderabad: Telangana High Court on Thursday quashed a criminal case against Chief Minister A. Revanth Reddy.

Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya quashed the case under section 447, 427, 506 read with 34 IPC and Section 2 (iv) (X) of SC, ST (PoA) Act.

The court observed that Revanth Reddy, who is accused No.3 in the crime, was not present at the scene of the offence at the relevant time. Therefore, the SC, ST (PoA) Act, 1989 registered against the petitioner does not arise.

“The SC, ST case against the petitioner is made without any factual or legal basis. The case is contrary to the contents mentioned in the Chargesheet...undisclosed facts mentioned in the chargesheet under the SC, ST (PoA) Act, 1989... hence, powers U/s. 484 can be exercised and passed orders in the present case as there is no cognizable offence of any kind, which disclosed the alleged petitioner (A. Revanth Reddy) in the Chargesheet. Hence, the petition filed by Revanth Reddy seeking quashing of SC, ST case against him is allowed,” the court said while quashing the proceedings, pending for trial before the Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Case under SCs/STs POA Act 1989 cum VII Addl. District Sessions Judge, RR district at LB Nagar, Hyderabad.

Revanth Reddy’s brother, Kondal Reddy, is accused number two in the case. Another person is accused number one. The case was registered against them in 2019 under the SCs/STs POA Act for allegedly abusing N. Peddi Raju, Director, Razole Constituency SC.

Before the pronouncement of the orders, advocate B.S Rao informed the court that the complainant has filed a petition in the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 12-07-2025, seeking TRANSFER of this case to any of the High Courts.

Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya observed that this case has been adjudicated in the High Court since September 22, 2020, and was heard by another coordinate bench till April 15, 2024, and thereafter. The case was assigned by the Acting Chief Justice to this court on April 16, 2025. Thereafter, this bench heard this petition

On the contention of B.S. Rao, the court said: “It is needless to say that the parties are at liberty to take whatever steps they intend to take, but this Court has passed its orders as the Court has to pass orders”.