Dismissed

Smt. Lethakari Swarupa and 3 others v. The State of Telanana and another

Telangana HC1 Nov 2021CRLP/284/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a petition under Section 482 CrPC as infructuous because the Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that a charge-sheet had been filed and a calendar case number assigned in the crime, leaving nothing for adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as infructuous; petitioners at liberty to work out remedies available under law.

Smt. Lethakari Swarupa and 3 others Vs The… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

¶3

IVONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DT. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITIO N NO: 284 OF 2021

¶7

Betwee n:

¶8

Smt. Lethakari Swarupa, W/o. Lethakari Ravi, aged 34 years Occ. Staff Nurse, Fl/o. H No. 3-4'1 , Kaleshwaram, Mahadevpur, Jayashankar (Bhupalpally) District

¶9

Smt. Bolli Parvathamma, W/o. Bolli Sammaiah, aged 40 years Occ. Sweeper, R/o. SC Colony, Hanumannagar Mahadevpur village and madnal Jayashankar (Bhupalpally) District

¶10

Sadu Sampeta, S/o. Durgaiah, aged 34^years, Occ. Barbar, R/o. Vallamkunta Village Malhar mandal, Jayashankar^{(Bhupalpally)} District

¶11

Smt. Srilatha Sampeta, Wo. Sadu Sampeta, aged 30^years Occ. House wife, R/o. Vallamkunta Village Malhar mandal, Jayashankar^{(Bhupalpally)District}

¶12

.Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 4

¶13

AND

¶14

The State of Telanana, Through SHO, Kaleshwaram Police^{Station, Jayashankar} (Bhupalpally) District Rep. by Public Prosecutor High Court at Hyderabad^{for the} State of Telangana

¶15

Chandrakala Sirigiri, S/o. Sammaiah^{Aged 27 years, R/o. SC Colony'} OCC.Business Mahadevpur, Jayashankar^{Bhupalpally District}

¶16

...RespondenUComplainant

¶17

Petition under section 482 of cr.P.c^{praying thatin the circumstancesstated} in the Nlemorandum of Grounds of^{criminal Petition, the High courtmay be pleased} to Quash the^proceedings in crime^{No. 106/2020 on the file of sHo,Kaleshwaram} Police Station. Jayashankar^{(Bhupalpally) District against the petitioners/ accused} no. 1 to 4.

¶18

l.A. NO: 2OF 2021

¶19

Petition under section^{482 of cr.P.cpraying that in the circumstancesstated} in the Memorandum of Grounds^{of Criminal Petition'the High Court may be pleased} to stay all further^{proceedingsin crimeNo.106/2020 on the file of sHo,} Kaleshwaram Police station,^{Jayashankar (Bhupalpally)District includingthe arrest} of the^petitioners/ Accused^{No.1 to 4.}

¶20

This Petition coming^{on for hearing, upon perusingthe Memorandum of} Grounds of Criminal^{Petitionand upon hearing the arguments of Sri Ajay Kumar} t,,ladisetty, Advocate^{for the Petitioner and the Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf} of the ResPondent^{No. 1 & 2.}

¶21

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

¶22

THE HOI'I'BLE DT. JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER

¶23

CRIIvIIN L PETITION No.284 ot 2O2t

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

Thls Criminal Petition, under Section 4BZ of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is filed by the petitioners/A.l to A.4, seeking to quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.106 oF 2020 of Kaleshwaram^police Station, JayashankarBhupalapally District.

¶26

Heard. Perused the record.

¶27

¶28

In the course of submissions, it is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Assistant public prosecutor, that charge-sheet has been filed in the subject crime before the Court concerned and Calendar Case number has been assigned,

¶29

In view of the above submission, nothing survives for adjudlcation in this Criminal petition.

¶30

Accordingly, this Criminal petition is djsmissed as infructuous. However, the petitioners/A,1 to A.4 are at liberty to work out the remedies available under law.

¶31

lvlrscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition shall stand closed.

¶32

SD/.B.SATYAVATHI ASS|STANT REGISTIAR //TRUE COpy// NL//

¶33

To,

¶34

SECTION OFFICER

¶35

I IJff :l|!li#ouse^{orficer, KaleshwaramPoticestation,Jayashankar}

¶36

2.) . One CC to Sri Aiav Kumap [Vls(isstty, Advocate [OPUC] ffi":.?^j: it"Jrgl i c^p ro s e c uto i,-ii,rj n E "i,iiiI i in e ! ta te or re I a ns a n a a t 4q. Two CD Cobies . One Spare Copy KNK

¶37

gbr 4t,

HIGH COURT

DATED: 011111',2021

{ a SIAI€ o
'o*
I
/cl lt
?.3 llN20?1

¶42

ORDER

¶43

CRLP.No.2$4 of 2021

¶44

DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS

¶45

Smt. Lethakari Swarupa and 3 others v. The State of Telanana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Lethakari Swarupa and 3 others v. The State of Telanana 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

Mulkalapalli Nagaraju Vs The State of Telangana

Ch. Somnath Vs The State of Telangana

Rajupalem Murali Mohan Vs The State of Telangana

Cholleti Srinivas Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Palloju Venkateshwarlu Vs The State of Telanagana, And Another

Vempati Ranjith Kumar Vs The State of Telangana