Partly allowed

Thirudi Mahesh v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC23 Aug 2021CRLP/6572/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of four conjunct criminal petitions. The court dispensed with the personal appearance of accused persons A-2 to A-4 on adjournment dates, opposed by public prosecutor only regarding A-1, and dismissed CRL.P. No. 6573 regarding A-1.

What did the court decide?

Personal appearance of petitioners A-2 to A-4 dispensed with except on specifically required dates. Petitions 6571, 6572, 6574 disposed of; Petition 6573 dismissed regarding petitioner A-1.

Thirudi Mahesh Vs The State of Telangana — Caste Atrocities | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR or r"orJ*.oBlfE^{oF rELANGANA}

¶2

MOND4Y, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF AUGUST rwo rHousAND AND rwErrrri oirii " "",

¶3

rHE HoNouRogL=:5!1,"E G. sRr DEV,

¶4

cRt M INAL PETITroN NOS :65 71. 65 72. 6573AND 6574 0F 2021

¶5

cRL.P.NO.6571 0F 2021:

¶6

Between:

¶7

Ill,ft:' i:Ixfls5rY,{s.yfilir?ll;,tfufl?,Eliii,,occ Farmer, # 4-88, Veerareddypa,i AND ...PET|TIoNERyACCUSED NO,4

¶8

rhe state of retangana, Rep. By pubtic prosecu,ii:.[rJr??,i,[;llrfi:tbpT"d"rt

¶9

yea rs, occ Fa rm e r, ' Rl:$tflTj,:illlfl?li; [,,,ff , ]l1t :gf,t Aq",?S,

¶10

...DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/RESPONDENT

¶11

Petition under Section 482 0f cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be preased to quash the proceedings in SC No.123r2o2o dated o4ro9/2020 against petitioner / Accused No.A4 on the fire of HON'BLE v ADDTTONAL DrsrRrcr AND SESSTONS JUDGE, AT SANGAREDDY

¶12

LA. NO: 1 oF 2021

¶13

Petition under section 482 of cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to pass interim order by granting stay of all further proceedings against A4 in sc No.12312020 dated 04-09-2020 on the fite of HON'BLE v ADD|IONAL DtsrRtcr AND SESSIONS JUDGE, AT SANGAREDDY

¶14

cRL.P.NO.6572 0F 2021 :

¶15

Between:

¶16

Thirudi Mahesh, S/o.Yellaiah, Age: 27 years, Occ Farmer, # 4-88, Veerareddypalli Village, Revenue Mandal Raipole, Siddipet District.

¶17

.......Petitioner/ Accused No.3

¶18

And

¶19

1, The State of Telangana, rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad. Respondent

¶20

Bhudamma Ayyagaila, w/o.tr/ankaiah, Age 60 ,"r;; 8""Ipllnant/ Rio.Waddepally, Raipole Mandal, Siddipet District.

¶21

....Defacto Complainant/ Respondent

¶22

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court^may be^pleased

¶23

to^{quashthe proceedingsin SC No'1231202Adaled 0410912020against Petitioner/} Accused^{No.A3 on the file of HON'BLE V ADDITIONALDISTRIC'| ANDSESSIONS} JUDGE,^{AT SANGAREDDY}

¶24

LA.NO.1^{0F 2021:}

¶25

Petition under Section^{482 ot Cr'P'C praying thatin the cilcumstancesstated} dum of Grounds^{of Criminal Petition'the High CoJrt may be pleased} in the [\i]emoran to^{pass interim} order by^{granting stay of all furtherproceeding:;agalnst A3 in SC} on the file^{of Hon'ble V AdCitional District and} No.12312020^{dated04-09-2020} Sessions^{Judge, at SangareddY}

¶26

cRL.P.NO.6573^{0F 2021:}

¶27

Betwee n:

¶28

Yellaiah Thirudi,^{S/o.Gallaiah,Aged 49 years,occ:Farmer, # 4-BB,Veerareddypalli} Village, Revenue^{Mandal Raipole,Siddipet District}

¶29

.......petitioner/^{Accused No.1}

¶30

And

¶31

The state of Telangana,^{rep.by Public Prosecutor, High court of Telangana,} Hyderabad.

¶32

Respondent

¶33

Bhudamma Ayyasaila, w/o.Mankaiah,^{Age 60} ,"r;;^{33I!l3lliJ,.l}

¶34

R/o.Waddepally, Raipole Mandal,^{SiddipetDistrict.}

¶35

......Defacto Comp,lainant/ Respondent

¶36

Petition under Section 482 ol Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Crturt may be^pleased to quash the proceedings in SC No.12312020 dated 04/09/2020 against^petitioner/ Accused No. Al on the file of Hon'ble V Additional District and Sessions Judge, at Sangareddy

¶37

l.A.NO.1 0F 2021:

¶38

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to pass^jnterim order by granting stay of all further proceedings against Al in SC No.12312020 daled 0410912020 on the file of Hon'ble V Additionat District and Sessions Judge, at Sangareddy

¶39

CRL.P.NO.6 74 0F 2021:

¶40

Between:

¶41

Thirudi Mallavva, Wo.Yellaiah, aged 43 years, Occ: Farmer, # 4-88, Veerareddypalli Village, Revenue Mandal Raipole, Siddipet District.

¶42

. . .. Petit oner/ Accused No.2

¶43

And

¶44

1 The State of Telangana, rep.by Public^prosecutor, High Corn, Hyderabad. ......ComplainanU Respondent

¶45

Bhudamma Orrrorll::y{g.Mankaiah, age 60 years, Occ: Farmer, R/o.Waddepaity, Raipore rra"rari, sjootili jl",r,",.

¶46

. . .. Defacto Compiainant/ Respondent

¶47

Petition under Section 482 of cr.P .c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be preased to quash the proceedings in sc No.12312020 dated 04-0g-2020 against petitioner/ Accused No A2 0n the fire of Hon'bre V Additionar District and sessions Judge, at Sangareddy

¶48

l.A.NO 10F20 1:

¶49

Petition under Section 4g2 0f cr.p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be preased to pass interim order by granting stay of aI further proceedings against 42 in sc No.12312020 dated 04-09-2020 on the fire of Hon,bre V Additionar District and Sessions Judge, at Sangareddy

¶50

These Petitions coming on for hearing, upon perusing the l.,lemorandum of Grounds of criminal Petitions and upon hearing the arguments of sri- Daraboina Subramanyam, Advocate for the Petitioner in all petitions and of the public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 in all petitions.

¶51

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶52

HONOURABLE^{JUSTICE G' SRI DEVI}

¶53

72.65^{73 AND 65740F 2021} CRI MI^N L PETITI ON NOs.^{657 1. 65}

¶54

coMM^ON RDER:

¶55

Since the^{four CriminalPetitions arise out of t1:resame case'} they are^{taken up togetherfor disposal'}

¶56

The petitioners /^{A-4,A-3, A-1 and A-2 respecti're1yfiied these} four Criminal^{Petitions underSection482 of the Codeof Criminal} Procedure seeking^{quashing of the proceedings in S C No'123 of} 2o2o on the file of^{the V Additional District and SessionsJudge at} Sangareddy.

¶57

A charge sheet came to be filed against^{the petitioners/A-1to} A-4 for the offences^punishable under^{Section 504 of the Indian} Penal Code and Section 3(t)(r)(s)(g) of the SCs & STs^(PoA) Act.

¶58

Though the present Criminal Petitions are fi1ed seeking quashing of entire proceedings, but learned counsel for the petitioners/A-1 to A-4 restricts his prayer seeking <lispensation of the presence of the petitioners/A-1 to A-4 before the trial Court on every date of adjournment.

¶59

The learned Public Prosecutor submits that since the identity of petitioners lA-2 to A-4 is not in dispute, their presence in the above case may not be necessary on every date of adjournment but he opposed to dispense with the presence of A- 1 before the trial Court.

¶60

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the personal appearance of the petitioners/A-2 to A-4 in S.C.No.123 of 2O2O on the file of the V Additional District and Sesr;ions Judge at

¶61

¶62

Sangareddy, is hereby dispensed with except on the dates when their presence is specifically required by the Court.

¶63

With the above direction, Criminal petition Nos.6571, 6572 and 6574 ol 2O2l are disposed of insofar as the petition ers/A-2 to A-4 are concerned and Criminal petition No.6573 of 2021 is dismissed insofar as the petitioner/A- l is concerned.

¶64

Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand

¶65

closed.

¶66

Note: As per the order dated 24.OI.2OZ1in LA.No.Z of 202i in Crt.p.No.6573 of 2021,,,petirion"iie:i ii,"d"tiJ,i"T' in the.tast tine of rhe un nrjmoereo pii;;;;ii'il;i" Substituted with^{,,petitioner/A_t,,.} This o-raTi^'-" ruo_surutes the order dated 21.09.2021 in Crt.P.No.657.l ot 2021 & Bri"t, ivi,i;;;;s disparched on 07.09.2021.

¶67

sd/-K.ONEstM i ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I

¶68

SD/-K.ONESIM

¶69

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// G"

¶70

¶71

SECTION OFFICER

¶72

I The V^ Additional District and Sessions Jqdge, at Sangareddy. 2 ].wo^{CCs to the Public prosecutor,HighCo"urt} io, tne"Stat" 6f Tetangana, Hyderabad (OUT)

¶73

1. One CC to Sri Daraboina Subrahmanyam, Advocate (OPUC)

¶74

Two CD Copies One Spare Copy

Kj gb r

'Xr+

HIGH^COURT

DATED:^2310812021

1t1L slefE
o
t) 12 ocT202l ,\Ct
Ji

¶80

AMENDED ORDER

¶81

CRLP.Nos.6571 ,6572,6573 and 6574 of²⁰²¹

¶82

DISPOSING OF THE CRL.P NOS.6571,6572 and 6574 AND DISMISSING THE CRL.P.NO.6573 OI= 2021

¶83

il7).
4Nu

Thirudi Mahesh v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thirudi Mahesh 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

Kiran Tidke Vs State of Telangana

Mohammed Khadar Vs The State of Telangana

S. Narasimha Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Adunuri Venakata Lakshmi and 3 others Vs The State of T.S. and another

Lakkineni Surender Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Reballe Sheshubabu,Narsimha Swamy Vs The State of Telangana