Dismissed

Medipally Bharath Kumar Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC12 Aug 2021CRLRC/51/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana dismissed a criminal revision filed by two accused persons seeking to recall prosecution witnesses. The court held the petition was not maintainable as the same order had already been challenged and disposed of on merits in a pending criminal petition filed earlier.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision case is dismissed as not maintainable due to having already challenged the order in a pending criminal petition.

Medipally Bharath Kumar Reddy Vs The State of… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR ,qr HvoTnEa?r#E^{oF TELANGANA}

¶2

THUT.i?tY.-THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST rwo rHousAND AND TWENiy oN;'"

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE G SRIDEVI

¶5

cRt MINAL REVISIO NCAS ENo: 51 OF 2021

¶6

criminar Revision case fired Under sections 3g7 and 401 0f cr.p.c against the Order in Cri.M.p.No. 06 ot 2O2O in S.C. No. 536 of 2017, dated.24.01 .2020 on the file of the court of the Fast rrack speciar Judge for Triar of cases Under pocso Act-cum-lX Additionar District and sessions Judge, (FCT) Ranga Reddy District, at L.B.Nagar.

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 Mediparry Bharath Kumar Re^ddy, S/o. Ir,/edipary Sudhakar Reddy, Krishna. aoed Apartments, Green about 33 vears, occ. Hi,s Cotony, Ct tLa^-studeni, atrhvrbrii.^{'n6.i1rii,]"'j'r} n'Jngu n"loy 13-to4t1, Disirici.",".,, Gavatri rlirs, ,', . Medipally Sudhakar Reddy, S/o. Late Ramachandra Reddy, aged about 63 vears.^occ. Leqar^{practitioder,} Fl/o. H.No- lt-li-t7'in', oayatii'niris Ap;ffi;.ir: Green Hills Co[ony, Chaitanyapuri. n,ngi n"djy o"iiiii.t.

¶9

...Petitioners

¶10

AND

¶11

f"f9,_S-tate o,t fglangana, represented by its public prosecutor, High Court of Ju0rcature lor the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶12

...Respondent

¶13

lA NO: 2 OF 202'l

¶14

Petition under section 482 of cr.P.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Revision Case, the High Court may be pleased to Stay of all further proceedings including the impugned order dated 24-12020 passed in Crl.lt4.P.No.06 of 2020 in S.C. No.536 of 2017 on the file of the Fast Track Special Judge for Trial Of Cases Under POCSO Act-Cum-lX Additional District and Sessions Judge, (FCT) Ranga Reddy District, at L.B. Nagar pending disposal of the Crl.RC.

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI G. ALLABAKASH

¶16

Counsel for the Respondent: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (TG)

¶17

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶18

HONOURABLE^{JUSTICE G.SRI DEVI}

¶19

CRIM^{INALREVISIoNcASENo.51oFZ021}

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

The^{present Crirninat RevisionCase is fitedby thr: petitioners/} of Cr.P.C.,^{seerking to quash} A-1 and^{A-2 under Sections 397 and 401} in Crt.M.P.No.6^{of 2020in} the order, dated^{24.01 .2020Passed} S.C.No.536 of^{2017on the fite of the Fast Track Special Judgefor} TriatofCasesunderPOCSOAct.cum-lXAdditiona.Districtand Sessions Judge^{(FTC),Ranga ReddyDistrict at L'B'Nagar,wherein} and whereunder, the^{petition fited under Section 31' of Cr'P'C' to} recatt PWs.1 to 3 for further^{cross-examinationwas di:;missed.}

¶22

The facts of the case in brief are that^{the petitionerswere} tried for the offences^{punishabte under Sections 376 (2) (h) (f), 354,} 374,375 (e) of lPC, Section 3 read with 4 of the^Preventionof Chitdren from Sexual Offences Act, Section 3⁽²⁾ (v) of the Scheduted Castes and Scheduted Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act,201 5, Sections'16 and 18 of the llonded Labour Abolition Act and Sections 75 and 79 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Chitdren) Act, 201 5. After cross-examination of P.Ws.1 to 3, the petitioners/A-1 and A-2 fited an ap1>ticat'ion under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. stating that some new facts re€tarding the age and caste of the victim and other facts were bror,ght on record during the evidence of other witnesses and prayed t<l recatl P.Ws.1 to 3 for their further cross-examination. A counter c.rme to be fited by the respondent-State stating that P.Ws.1 to J were cross-

¶23

¶24

examined at length and the apptication is fited onty to fitt up the lacunae in their defence. After considering the rival submissions, the learned triat Judge dismissed the said petition. euestion.ing the same, the present Criminat Revision Case came to be fited.

¶25

Heard [earned Counsel for the petitioners/A-1 and A-2 and learned Additionat pubtic prosecutor for the respondent-State.

¶26

A perusal of the materiaI on record, chattenging the .impugned order, the petitioners have atready fited criminat petition No.926 of 2020 before this Court. By an order, dated 19.02.2020, this Court dismissed the said Criminat petition, hotding that the impugned order appears to be based on sound reasoning and that there is no jurisdictionaI error and that there is no materia[ 'irregutar,ity or ittegatity in the order passed by the Court betow. Without chatlenging the order, dated 19.02.2020 passed by this Court in Criminal Petition No.926 of 7020, the peritioners again fited the present Crinrinal Revision Case. Hence, this Criminal Revision Case is not maintainabte since the petitioners have already chattenged the impugned order and this Court has also passed orders on merits.

¶27

Accordingty, the Criminat Revision Case is dismissed.

¶28

As a sequel thereto, miscettaneous^petitions, if any,^pending

¶29

shatl stand closed.

¶30

SD/.M,RAMANA "-'^'ii'ii;iriv REGTsTRAR^KRISHNA i __., _\i ;

//TRUE COPY'

SECTION^OFFICER

To,

The Fast^{Track Special Judge for Trial ol-q1:": Under POCSO AcFCum-lX} Additional^{District and S""til"t L'OSe' (FCT) Ranga Reddy District at}

¶36

, itl; !,X?SL^{House officer'Chaitanvapuri Police station' Ranga ReddvDistrict} 3. Two^{ccs to the puuri. p"rosicuioi,'nigh court for the stateof Telangana, at} Hvderabad [OUT]

¶37

, ljl["#iJ^{ir-G'Atlabakasn'Advocate[oPUc]}

¶38

Two^{CD CoPies}

¶39

One^{SPare CoPY} t\ll\lK gtrgq..F

¶40

HIGH COURT

¶41

DATED:^1210812021

¶42

1 irE 'rAf.r
(
e
c
01sEPzSll
+
* l-)5o6a-'

¶43

ORDER

¶44

CRLRC.No.5'l ot 2021

¶45

DISMISSING THE CRIMINALREVISION CI\SE

Medipally Bharath Kumar Reddy v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Medipally Bharath Kumar Reddy 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

Medipally Bharath Kumar Reddy Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Srimalla Shivashanker and 4 others Vs The State of Telangana and another

Kagada Kunal Singh Vs The State of Telangana

State of Telangana , Rep by the Pp., Vs Meerza Ahmed Baig , Amzad Baig, Kataram (M).

Battikadi Narasimha Goud Vs The State of Telangana

Bommi Reddy Tirupathireddy Vs The State of Telangana