Dismissed

Bhukya ,Dharavath Pooja v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC6 Aug 2021CRLP/2063/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana dismissed a criminal petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and an application under Section 492 Cr.P.C. regarding offences of causing miscarriage, intimidation, and illegal termination of pregnancy as infructuous based on the submission that it no longer survives for adjudication.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Petition was dismissed as infructuous.

Bhukya ,Dharavath Pooja Vs The State of Telangana — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 2063 OF 2020

¶7

Between:

¶8

Bhukya @ Dharavath Pooja, W/o. BSS Krishnakant Naik, D/o. Narender, Aged about.26 yeas, Occ. Nill, F/o. H.No.8-43/4/14, West Balaji Hills, Boduppal, Uppal Mandal, Medchal-Malkazgiri District-39.

¶9

Dharavath Narender, S/o. Hanumanthu, Age. 50 years, Occu. ASI in RPF,

¶10

Dharavath Sharada, Wio. Dharavath Narender, Age. 45 years, Occu. House wife, R/o. H.No.8-43/4i 14, West Balaji Hills, Boduppal, Uppal lr/andal, tr,4edchalIt4alkazgiri District-39.

¶11

Dharavath Vaishalini, D/o. Dharavalh Narender, 24 yearc, Occu. Software employee, R/o. H.No.8-4314114, West Balaji Hills, Boduppal, Uppal lVandal, Ir,4edchal-lr,4alkazgiri District-39,

¶12

Dharavath Preethi, D/o. Dharavath Narender, 22 years, Occu. Student, R/o. H, No.8-43/4/14, West Balaji Hills, Boduppal, Uppal l\4andal, lr4edcha l- l,4a lkazg iri District-39.

¶13

Dharavath Vamshi Prudvi, S/o. Dharavath Narender, Age. 20 years, Occu.Student, R/o, H.No.B-4314114, Vl esl Balaji Hills, Boduppal, Uppal It4andal, lVedchal-lValkazgiri District-39.

¶14

.. Petitioners/Acc use d No.1 to 6

¶15

AND

¶16

1 The State of Telangana, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature, at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana.

¶17

2 The Station House Officer, Khanapur (Haveli) Police Station Khammam Town and Mandal Khammam District.

¶18

3 B.S.S. Krishnakanth Naik, S/o. Bhukya Bichu Naik, Aged about 30 years, Occu.Assistant Manager in Andhra Bank, Yellandu Branch,With staff No.33973 Ri./o. Near New Seetharamakalyana Mandapam, Nelakonda pally, Khammam District5OT 160.

¶19

... Responde nts/Com plainant

¶20

Petition under Section 482 ot Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records in Crime No.372 of 2019 of Police Station Khanapur (Haveli) Dated. 26.11.2019 forthe offences punishable U/Sec. 312, 314, 315, 504, 506, 509 of IPC and Sec. 3 of MTP Act, 66(AXB) of ITA Act, 2008, 156 (3) of Cr.P.C on the file of ll Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Khammam and quash the same to the extent of the^petit io ne rs/a ccu sed No.1 to 6.

¶21

l.A. NO: 1OF 2020

¶22

Petition under section 492 of cr.p.c praying that in thr; circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be preased to direct the Respondent No.2 not to arrest the petitionersrAccused No.1 to 6 in crime No.372 of 2o19 of porice station Khanapur (Haveri) Deted 26.11.20.19 for the offences punishabre U/s under Sec. 312, 314, 315, 504, so6, 509 of rpc and Sec. 3 of lt/TP Act, 66(AXB) of trA Act, 2008, 156 (3) of cr.p.c. on the fite of il Additionat Judicial First crass Magistrate, at Khammam, pending disposar of the above criminar Petition.

¶23

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the IVemorandum of Grounds of Criminal petition and upon hea ring the arguments of sri. J. Azad chendra Shekar, Advocate for the petitioners ard the Assistant pubric Prosecutor on beharf of the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 and of the Respondent No.3 not appearing in person or by Advocate.

¶24

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶25

HONOURABLE JUSTICE^{G. SRI DEVI}

¶26

CRIN,IINAL PETITION NO.2063 0F 2020

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor^{for the respondent-State} would submit that the cause in this^{CriminalPetitiondoes not} survive for further adjudication and^{the Crimina-l Petitionhas} become infructuous.

¶29

In that view of the matter,^{recordingthe said submission,the}

¶30

Criminal Petition^is dismissed^{as infructuous.}

¶31

Miscellaneous applications, if anv,^{pending shall stantl}

¶32

¶33

clisrlrssr.d.

¶34

SD/. I. NAGA^LAKSHMI ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR 6" //TRUE COPY// SECTION^OFFICER

¶35

To, 1. The ll Additional^{Judicial First CIassMagistrate'at Khammam'} 2. The^{stationHouseonicer, ffiil;} iir"uurir^{poii"" SrationKhammamDistrict} 3. Two ccs^{to tne punric 'pro;"Jfor,' Highcourt for the state of rerangana,} at Hvderabad [OUT] 4 6;;'# ;;:;il^{I leiaochendraShekar' Advocate[oPUc]} 5. Two CD^CoPies o. One^{SPare CoPY}

I,1N,lK TP

HIGH COURT

DATED: 0610812021

ORDER

gE 5 AI a
Y
f,
G2$21
o 2 3AU
,'}..
0.-e -

¶41

CRLP.No.2063 of 2024

¶42

DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS

¶43

7n>4

Bhukya ,Dharavath Pooja v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhukya ,Dharavath Pooja v. The State of Telangana

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 State of Telangana Rep by Pp., Vs Mohammed Imran, Hyd and 5 Otrs.

The Drugs Inspector, Vs Kadaverugu Sudhakar

Dhadhi Ravi Vs The State of Telangana

Magapu Ram Mohan, And 11 Others Vs The State of Telangana, And Another

Pittala Mahender Vs The State of Telangana

S.Venkata Rangaiah Vs state of telangana