Dismissed

D.Lingaiah, v. the State of Ap Rep by Its Pp Hyd., and Another

Telangana HC4 Dec 2017CRLP/3519/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses a criminal petition seeking quashing of proceedings in a criminal complaint alleging assault. The court held that allegations did not constitute official duties, rendering the case ineligible for quashing under Section 197 CrPC, and quashed the interim stay granted earlier.

What did the court decide?

Criminal petition No.3519 of 2011 dismissed. Interim stay in CRLPMP.No.3749 of 2011 vacated.

D.Lingaiah, Vs the State of Ap Rep by Its Pp… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2017)

¶1

SMT JUSTI CE T. RAJANI

¶2

CRI MI NAL PETI TI ON No.3 5 1 9 of 2 0 1 1

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

This petition is filed seeking for quash of the proceedings in CC.No.309 of 2011 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Tandur, Ranga Reddy District.

¶5

Heard counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, who takes notice for first respondent. None appears for the second respondent in spite of notice.

¶6

The facts of the case as per the complaint are that the petitioner, who is a police official, ferociously pounced upon the complainant, when he tried to telephone his relatives, A1 destroyed the telephone and gave a kick blow with his boot legs on the stomach and due to kicks, the complainant fell down and other constables caught the hands of the complainant on his back by removing cloths and A1 beat L.W.2, abusing him in filthy language. He also directed other constables working under him to bring lathis and then A1 and A2 dragged the complainant into a cell and beat him very mercilessly. The complainant gave a report against the accused and at the behest of the other accused, this accused acted in the above manner.

¶7

The counsel for the petitioner submits that all the above instances are prior to the complaint and no complaint was lodged by the date of the incident. But the said ground is not at al comprehensible, as the complaint would be given only in respect of the offence which already took place. The other contention that sanction under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code has to be obtained

¶8

¶9

also does not hold merit, as the allegations do not constitute part of the official duties of the accused. Hence, this Court opines that this is not a fit case for quash of proceedings.

¶10

The criminal petition is dismissed. The interim stay, granted earlier, in CRLPMP.No.3749 of 2011 dated 26.04.2011 shall stand vacated. As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall stand closed.

¶11

__________ T. RAJANI, J

¶12

December 4, 2017 DSK

D.Lingaiah, v. the State of Ap Rep by Its Pp Hyd., and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Lingaiah, v. the State of Ap Rep by Its Pp Hyd., 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

The Apsrtc., Musheerabad, Hyderabad Vs G.Ramanamma and 7 Others

Shaik Jilani Basha Vs Smt. S. Govvardhana and Another

Vipin Kumar Mehra and 3 Others, Vs the State of Ap Rep by Its Pp Hyd., and Another

Pamidi Narayana, and Another, Vs Mrs. Gore Anitha, and Another

Vemula Rajesham, Husnabad, and Another Vs the State of a.P.,Rep. Pp. High Court, through Sho, Husnabad

Smt.Mannepalli Praveenasri and Another, Vs the State of a.P., Rep by Pp., and Another