Dismissed

T.Sri Ramachandra Murthy v. State of Ap.Rep.Pp.Hyd.Another

Telangana HC17 Nov 2021CRLA/1101/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal appeal was filed against an order dismissing a complaint for default under Section 256 Cr.P.C. due to the complainant's absence. The appellant was not present nor was any representation made on his behalf. The Court observed the appellant had no interest to pursue the matter.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Appeal is dismissed. The impugned order dated 09.07.2003 is upheld.

T.Sri Ramachandra Murthy Vs State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

WEDNESDAY ,THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶5

CRIMINAL APP EAL NO: 110 1 0F 2008

¶6

criminal Appeal Under Section 378( 4 ) of cr.p.c against the order dated g-72003 in c.c.No.2002 of 2001 on the file of Additional Judicial First class lVagistrate,Hyderabad East and North,Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad .

¶7

Between:

¶8

T.Sri Ramachandra Murthy, S/o.Late Tangirala krishna l,4urthy.aged 52 years. Financial Consultant, R/o.PIot No 40,Joseph Akash Enclave, JJ.Nagar Post,Secuderabad .

¶9

..,PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT

¶10

AND

¶11

Y.Sankar, S/o.Balaiah aged 49 years , Occ:Real Estate Agent Rl/o.S cJ.?"dli

¶12

G. K. c o I o n y,⁽ F I at N o. 4 ) off i ce rs *, ", I : -. 3E i,!fl iBBtT;,

¶13

State of A.P, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P, Hyderabad.

¶14

...RESPODENTS

¶15

Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. P.L.NARASIMHARAO (Not present)

¶16

Counsel forthe Respondent No.2: ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (TG)

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent No. 1 : NONE APPEARED

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

"'eur

¶20

THE HON'BLE^{DT. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER} Crimin al ooeal No.11O Lof2^o8

¶21

BDEB:

¶22

Heard the learned^{Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for} respondent No.2-State^{and perusedthe record.}

¶23

2.Norepresentationfortheappellant.Onearlieroccasionalso, there was no representation^{for the appellant.It appearsthat the} appellant has no interest^{to pursue the matter.}

¶24

The challenge in this Criminal^{Appealis to the order,dated} 09.07.2003,^passed, in C.C.No.2002^{of 2001, bv the Additional ludicial} Magistrate of First Class,^{HyderabadEast and North, RangaReddy} District at L.B.Nagar. The^{impugnedorder reads as follows:}

¶25

"Complainant is absent. Accused^{(SS) summons not returned. For} compiainant no representation.^{Hence, presents of complainants} ls felt essential to enquiry^{aboutserviceof summonsto accused.} Hence, complaint is dismissed^{for default u/s. 256 of Cr.P'C.}

¶26

The Court below, after recording^{a categoricalfindingthat in view} of the absence of the^{appellant/complainant, the case cannot be} proceeded against the accused, rightly dismissed the^{complaint for} default by exercising^{power under Section 256 of Cr.P.C. Thereis no} illegality or impropriety in the order^{underchallenge.}

¶27

Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed.

¶28

Miscellaneous^petitions, if any,^{pending in this Criminal Appeal}

¶29

shall stand closed

¶30

sD/-cH ',ENKATESWARULU DEPUTY^REGISTRAR

,TRUE^COPY'

SECTION^OFFICER

TO,

The Additional^{JUdicialFirst Ctass Magistrate,HydelabadEaStand North Ranga Reddy} o,i",i",ii''--^{e.N"saiHvoerauaoCilith P<corrd5 )} ^ 2. Two ccs^{to Assistant puuticprojlcu#' iiigh?;;'itott'he stateo{ Telansana' at Hvderabad} TOUTI

¶36

b""""'dc,"^{sRl. P L.NARASIMHARA.'AdvocateloPuc]} 4 Two CD^Copies 5 One Spare^CoPY CD L TR .\p)-

HIGH COURT

DATED:1711'112021

ORDER

CRLA.No.1 101 of 2008

¶41

¶42

DISMISSING THE CRL..4

T.Sri Ramachandra Murthy v. State of Ap.Rep.Pp.Hyd.Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Sri Ramachandra Murthy v. State of Ap.Rep.Pp.Hyd.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

Smt.M.Rajyalaxmi, Vs P.Chandrasekhara Sastry and Another

Budarapu Srinivas, Vs Budarapu Sandhya Rani and Another

Anees Mohiuddin , Ameer , Abu Ayub Ansari Vs State of Andhra Pradesh rep. by its Public Prosecutor

M/S. Om Surya Electronics Pvt.Ltd. Vs M/S. a-Z Marketing and the State of A.P.

Smt. R.Krishnaveni, Vs the State of a.P., Rep by Pp

Goka Rajaiah , Rajaiah and Another, Vs State of a.P., Rep by Pp.