Disposed

N.R.Hari Babu and Another v. State of Telangana and Another

Telangana HC22 Mar 2016CRLP/3929/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court exercised its powers under Section 482 CrPC in a money-laundering and cheating case involving unrepaid short-term housing loans. The Court refused to quash the FIR but directed police to conduct investigation without arrest, issuing notice for appearance instead.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; Police directed to investigate without arrest and issue notice for appearance upon undertaking.

N.R.Hari Babu and Another Vs State of Telangana and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2016)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.3929 OF 2016

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This petition is filed by the petitioners-accused Nos. 2 and 3 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings against them in FIR No.23 of 2016 on the file of Malkajgiri Police Station, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 403, 406, 418, 420, 426 and 506 IPC.

¶4

Heard and perused the material available on record.

¶5

It is alleged that the petitioners and other accused are the members of the complainant-society. A1 to A3 took housing loans as short term loans and started evading repayment of the same in spite of issuance of legal notices to them.

¶6

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that as the private complaint filed by the 2^nd respondent was referred to the police, the above crime was registered and that the learned Magistrate has not followed the procedure while referring the matter to the police.

¶7

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the allegations made in the complaint, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the proceedings in the above crime.

¶8

At this stage, the learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that due to pendency of the above crime, the petitioners apprehend arrest and harassment in the hands of the 1^st respondent-police.

¶9

In view of the above submission, the 1^st respondent-police are directed to complete the investigation and file a final report, if any, in accordance with law, without arresting the petitioners. In the event of necessity, the 1^st respondent-police are directed to issue notice to the petitioners for the purpose of investigation. On issuance of such notice, the petitioners are directed to appear before the investigating officer and give an undertaking as to their future appearance as and when required by the investigating agency for the purpose of

¶10

investigation.

¶11

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶12

______________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶13

Date : 22.3.2016 Nn

¶14

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶15

CRIMINAL PETITION No.3929 OF 2016

¶16

DATED 22.3.2016

¶17

N.R.Hari Babu and Another v. State of Telangana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.R.Hari Babu and Another v. State of Telangana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Javeed Khan Vs The State of Telangana

M.Radha Krishna Reddy, Vs R.Dhana Laxmi

Smt.M.Shakunthala Vs The State of Telangana.,rep.,Pp

Shaik Hasham, Vs Md. Fathima

S.Siva, Vs The State

S Venkatrama Raju Vs State of Andhra Pradesh