Partly allowed

J. Raju v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC23 Dec 2021CRLP/9813/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Telangana High Court allowed a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in part. Proceedings against the petitioner for offences under the Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act were quashed as he is a customer. The magistrate was directed to proceed against him for offences under IPC Section 370(A)(2).

What did the court decide?

Quashing of proceedings under Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act; direction to prosecute under IPC Section 370(A)(2).

J. Raju Vs The State of Telangana — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER

¶3

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITIO NO: 9813 OF 2O2L

¶7

Between:

¶8

J. Raju, S/o. l. Rajarathnam Age. 29^years, Occ. Student of^MSC Nursing, R/o.^H.No. tl-l4lE, Road No. 3, Green Hills Colony, Kothapet, Hyderabad.

¶9

PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO 3

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep. by the Public Prosecutor High Coutt at Hyderabad.

¶12

The Station House Officer, Police Station Medipally,^Rachakonda Commissionarate, Ranga Reddy District.

¶13

.....RESPONDENTS/COM PLAINANT

¶14

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^quash the^proceedings in PRC No. 83/2021 on the^file of the III^Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy

¶15

LA. NO: 1OF 2021

¶16

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 stay all further^proceedings including appearance of^{Petitioner in PRC No'} B3l202t on the file of the Hon'ble III^{Metropolitan lulagistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.} Nagar, Ranga Reddy District, during the^pendency of Criminal^petition

¶17

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the^Memorandumof Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing^{the arguments of Sri P ANIMIREDDY} ,Advocate^{for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutoron behalfof the Respondent} No. 1&2

¶18

The Couft made the following: ORDER

¶19

THE HO IOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.^LAKSHMI\N

¶20

CRM INAL PETITION No.9813 of 2O2L

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

This ma ter was listed on 2l-12-2021 and this Court after hearing l:e learned counsel for the petitioner / A-3^and learned Publi< Prosecutor allowed this Crimina-l Petition in part quashing the proceedings against the petitioner herein / A-3 for the offr nces under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Prevention of ImmoraL Traff c Act and directed the learnecl MzLgistrate to proceed again;t the petitioner herein for the offe:nct: under Section 370 (A (2) of IPC.

¶23

Thereaftr r there was confusion with regzud to status of ttre petitioner herein in the charge str.eet. At one^pl{rce the Investigating^{( ,fficer} has mentioned that ti.re pc:titior-rer hereitt is a supplier E nd in the concluding part it is mentiorted that the petitioner : s customer. In view of the same, the order dated 2l-I2-2 l2I is re-called and it is listed todav for further hearing.

¶24

Both the learned counsel for the peLitroner and learneci Public Prosec rtor, referring to the stalements ,rf saicl witne sse s and a]so the contents of the charge sh eet, woukl submit that th : petitioner herein is only a cllstorncr'.

¶25

¶26

i I

¶27

In view of the said^{facts and also the fact that the} petitioner herein / A-3 is^{oniy acustornerand the} proceedings against the^{petitioner herein in respectof offence} a-lleged under Sections 3,^{4 and 5 of Prevention of Immora-I} Traffic Act are^{quashed. Learned Magistrate is directed to} proceed the P.R.C.No.83 of^{202 1againstthe petitioner} herein/ A-3 in^{respect of Section 370 (A)(2) of IPC'}

¶28

Accordingly, the Criminal^{Petitionis allowed in part'}

¶29

Miscellaneous Petitions,^{pending ifany, shall stand}

¶30

closed.

¶31

SD/-K.VENKAIAH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR llrRUEcoPYll {.1b srcri6r oFFrcER

¶32

To,

¶33

The III Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy Distrlct

¶34

The Station House Officer, Medipally Police Station Medipally, Rachakonda Commissionarate, Ranga Reddy District.

¶35

One CC to SRI P ANII4I REDDY Advocate [OPUC]

¶36

Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶37

Two CD Copies

¶38

One Spare Copy.

s{}

HIGH COURT

DATED:2311212tt21

-itrE SIAr
/
1g Jrq ?'tt

¶44

ORDER

¶45

CRLP.No.9813 )f 2021

¶46

PARTLY ALLO ruING THE CRIMINAL PETIT'ION

J. Raju v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J. Raju 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

Bandla Jaganmohan Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

K. Gopi Vs The State of Telangana

Balakavi Sai Vikram Vs The State of Telangana

Sandhya Vs The State of Telangana

I Shiva Kumar and 4 Others Vs The State of Telangana and Another

Tungala Laxmi Raghava Vs State of Telangana