Partly allowed

Varkala Mallesh , Verakaala Ravi Kiran, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Telangana HC12 Nov 2014CRLP/10452/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings against a juvenile for theft and burglary, the court held that the material was prima facie sufficient for investigation. While dismissing the quash petition, the court directed the SHO not to arrest the petitioner until the investigation concludes.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition dismissed but Station House Officer directed not to arrest petitioner till completion of investigation or filing of report.

Varkala Mallesh , Verakaala Ravi Kiran, Vs The… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2014)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY CRIMINAL PETITION No.10452 of 2009

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/Juvenile in Conflict with Law No.1 in Crime No.15 of 2005 of Munugodu Police Station, Nalgonda District registered for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 read with 511 I.P.C.

¶4

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the allegations made in the complaint do not constitute the offences alleged.

¶5

The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the allegations made in the complaint prima facie constitute the offences alleged.

¶6

A perusal of the record reveals that the petitioner is the Juvenile in Conflict with Law No.1 and the second respondent is the de facto complainant in Crime No.15 of 2005.

¶7

As per the allegations made in the complaint, on 14.03.2005 some unknown persons made an attempt to commit theft in Canara Bank, Munugodu Branch and on seeing the second respondent, those persons ran away.

¶8

While deciding the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court has to take into consideration the allegations made in the complaint only. The Court is not be justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to probability, reliability or genuineness of the allegations made in the complaint at the initial stage of investigation. The material placed before the Court is prima facie sufficient to investigate into the matter in order to ascertain the truthfulness or otherwise of the allegations made in the complaint.

¶9

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in R.P.Kapoor v. State of Punjab and State of Haryana v. Bhajanlal, I am of the view that it is not a fit case to quash the proceedings at the initial stage of the investigation.

¶10

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the concerned Station House Officer may be directed not to arrest the petitioner till completion of the investigation.

¶11

A perusal of the record reveals that this Court granted interim stay on 14.12.2009 and the same has been in force till date.

¶12

In view of the earlier orders passed by this Court, the Station House Officer,

¶13

Munugodu is hereby directed not to arrest the petitioner/Juvenile in Conflict with Law No.1 in Crime No.15 of 2005 till completion of the investigation or filing of the report.

¶14

With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.

¶15

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

¶16

________________________ T.SUNIL CHOWDARY, J

¶17

Date: 12.11.2014 Ivd

Varkala Mallesh , Verakaala Ravi Kiran, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Varkala Mallesh , Verakaala Ravi Kiran, v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Goppu Satishkumar, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh through Station House Officer

T.Ashok, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

P. Ramesh Reddy Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

M/s. General Motors India Pvt. Ltd., Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Ghouse Mohammed Khan, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

Battini Netaji, Hyd. Vs Battini Jayalakshmi and Ano