In this criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Telangana High Court granted relief to the petitioner, an accused in a betting case, to restrict prosecution procedure to Section 41-A Cr.P.C. following Arnesh Kumar guidelines.
Relief restricted to authorities following Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and Arnesh Kumar guidelines.
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.
HIGH COURT FORTHE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
MONDAY ,THE SEVENTHDAYOF DECEIV1BER TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR
CRIMIN AL PETITIO NO: 6149 OF 2020
Between:
Montu Bandari, S/o. Dalpat Bandari,Aged about39, Occ. Business,F/o H.No.2 - 3- 569, Flat No 405, GaganParadise AaartmentsD.V.Colony Secunderabad
...PETITIONERYACCUSE NO.1
AND
State of Telagnana, rep., by P.P High Court for the State of Telangana atHyderabad
...RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT
Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.Cpraying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the FIR ln Crime No 166 of 2020 of Ramgopalpet Police Station Secudnerabad in respect of the petitioner.
l.A. NO: 2 OF 2020
Petition under Section 482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances stated in tlre Memorandum of Grounds of criminalpetition,the High court may be pleased to stay of all further proceedings ln crime No 166 of 2020 of Ramgopalpet police Station Secudnerabad pending quash petition.
This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri p PRABHAKAR REDDY ,Advocate for the petitioner and the public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No 1.
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR RI I P I 4 f
ORDER,:
This criminal petition is filed by the petitioner, who is arrayed as A.1 in Crime No.166 of 2O2O on the file of Ramgopatpet police Station, Sccunderabad, for the offences punishabre under sections 3 and 4 of the Telangana Gaming Act, 1974, as amended from time to time, to quash the proceedings in the above said crime.
through video conferencing.
present criminal petition is flled seeking quashing of FIR No.166 of 2070, he would restrict the relief sought for in the present petition to the authorities following the procedure laid down under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court tn ARNESH KUMAR V/s. STA\E OF BIHAd.
{2014) 8 SCC 273
2
KuMAR'scase (supra)' However'the above reliefis on theassertion of thelearned counsel for the petitionerthat the provision of lawunderwhlch the petitioner has been charqedwithin the crime hasnot beenaltered by invokingthe other provisionsof IPC as of today.
Sd/.K.AMM ASSISTANTRE //TRUE COPY// SECTI N OFFICER
To,
HIGH COURT
TVKJ
DATED:07112t2020
ORDER
CRLP.No.6149 of 2020
1 r{e S rA
lolo 1 0 DEC 2m0 a
.b
/(<br>
DISPOSSINC THECRIMINALPETITION
).rt)n
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to relief under Section 482 Cr.P.C. while following the procedure under Section 41-A Cr.P.C.
Whether offences under the Telangana Gaming Act, 1974 attract the mandatory arrest guidelines of Arnesh Kumar.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Arnesh Kumar v/s. State of BiharFollowed¶26
AIR 2014 (2014) 8 SCC 273 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Montu Bandari
State of Telangana
T. Vinod Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
