The Hon'ble Court dismissed a Criminal Petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings as infructuous because the investigating officer had filed a charge sheet and the Metropolitan Magistrate had taken cognizance.
The Criminal Petition is dismissed as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.410 of 2016
ORDER:
When the present Criminal Petition was called in regular course in the morning session, learned counsel for the petitioner/Accused No.3 requested to pass it over despite the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Telangana representing that charge sheet in the present crime was filed and Calender Case number was also assigned, and, therefore, the matter was passed over to call at 01.20 p.m. However, when the matter is called again at 01.20 p.m., there is no representation for the petitioner.
In the present petition, the petitioner sought to quash the proceedings in Crime No.16 of 2016 of P.S.Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor would represent that after completion of investigation in the present crime, the Investigating Officer has filed charge sheet and the learned XVII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad has taken cognizance in Calender Case No.1042 of 2016 and, therefore, the present petition becomes infructuous.
In view of the aforesaid submission made by learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the Criminal Petition is dismissed as infructuous at the stage of admission itself.
2
Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this petition, stand
closed.
A. SHANKAR NARAYANA, J February 14, 2017. v v
The Petitioner/Accused No.3
The State of Telangana
A. Shankar Narayana
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
