Telangana HC Quashes SC/ST Atrocities Case Against Revanth Reddy

The atrocities case was registered against Revanth Reddy based on a complaint lodged by N. Peddi Raju, the director of Razole Constituency S.C. Mutually Aided Cooperative Housing Society Limited, in 2016 at Gachibowli Police Station.

In his complaint, he alleged that Revanth Reddy, his brother A. Kondal Reddy, and others illegally trespassed on land belonging to the society, demolished a room on the premises using a JCB in Survey No. 127, Gopanapally village, wrongfully disposed of the society’s land, and abused the complainant using filthy language, including caste-based slurs.

The case had been pending since then and was at the trial stage before the Special Sessions Judge for Trial of Cases under the SCs/STs PoA Act, 1989-cum-VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at LB Nagar.

Revanth Reddy, however, approached the High Court seeking to quash the case and set aside the criminal proceedings.

Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya of the High Court heard the matter several times and pronounced the judgment on Thursday, allowing Revanth Reddy’s plea. The court noted that Revanth Reddy was not physically present at the location and time mentioned in the complaint. Hence, it held that the case against him was not maintainable.

Further, the court observed: “The case was not made out by the complainant... The SC/ST case against the petitioner Revanth Reddy was filed without any factual or legal basis... The case is contrary to the contents of the chargesheet... Unsubstantiated facts were mentioned in the chargesheet under the SC/ST (PoA) Act, 1989... Hence, powers under Section 482 can be exercised to pass orders in the present case, as no cognizable offence of any kind was disclosed against the petitioner (Revanth Reddy) in the chargesheet. Hence, the criminal petition filed by Revanth Reddy seeking quashing of the SC/ST case against him is allowed.”

Prior to the pronouncement of the orders on Thursday, advocate B.S. Rao, representing the de facto complainant N. Peddi Raju, informed the judge that the complainant had filed a petition before the Supreme Court on July 12, 2025, seeking transfer of the case to another High Court.

However, Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya proceeded with the pronouncement and observed that the case had been under adjudication in the High Court since 22 September 2020, and was earlier heard by a coordinate bench until April 15, 2024, before being listed before her bench.

The judge further stated: “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 it is the duty of the court to do so.”