Dismissed

Singirala Sathyanarayana v. The State of Telangana And Another

Telangana HC1 Sept 2022CRLA/290/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court case dismissed a Criminal Appeal and a corresponding petition for leave to appeal and condonation of delay for non-prosecution, as the appellant failed to appear despite multiple court listings.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Appeal No. 290 of 2020 and I.A. No. 1 & 2 of 2020 dismissed for non-prosecution. Pending miscellaneous applications shall stand closed.

Singirala Sathyanarayana Vs The State of Telangana And… — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY ,THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN

¶4

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 290 OF 2020

¶5

Appeal under Section 378(4) of Cr.P.C against the Judgement Dt. 2610312019 passed in C.C.No.514 of 2016, on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Special Mobile at Karimnagar).

¶6

Between:

¶7

Singirala Sathyanarayana, S/o. Late Rajaram, Aged 44 Yrs, Occ. Private Electrician, Rl/o. H. No. 7 -1 - 247, Mankammathota, Karimmnagar District

¶8

AND

¶9

...APELLANT/COMPLATNANT

¶10

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

¶11

...RESPONDENT

¶12

Mallarapu Narsingam, S/o. Lasmaiah, Aged about 45 Yrs, Occ. Business, Rl/o. H. No. 3 - 6 - 39, Adarshnagar Karimnagar, Karimnagar District ...RESPODENT/ACCUSED

¶13

lA NO: 1 OF 2O2O

¶14

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant leave to the petitioner herein to prefer Crl. A before this Hon'ble Court against the Judgement passed in C. C. No. 514 of 2016, Ot.2610312019 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Special Mobile at Karimnagar) lA NO: 2 OF 2020

¶15

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the^petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 203 days in filing the present Criminal Appeal before this Hon'ble Court against^judgment passed in C.C.No.514 of 2016, dt.26-03-2019 on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, (Special Mobile at Karimnagar)

¶16

Counsel for the Appellant: SRI LALA RAMU

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (TG)

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: None Appeared

¶19

The Court made the following: JUDGMENT

¶20

THE HONOL TiABLE DR. JUSTICE D.NA,:IARIUNI CRII IINAL APPEAL No.290 of l202tl

¶21

ORDEI(:

¶22

This Crimi ral Appeal is praying this Court to set asirie tlre^judgment da ecl 26.03.2019 in C.C.No.514 of 20 tr on the fjle of the learned Iudicial Magish"ate of First ClaLs,s,, (fipecial l'4obile), Kariml a<1ar, whereir.r the respondt-nt lterein was found not guil v for the offr:ncc under Sccti,;n ] 38 of Negotiable Instn rnerrts Act.

¶23

Therr is r1o representation on beh,rlf of the appellant/compr rinar.rt. As seen from the proceeCing sheet, the appellant fr iled to appear before Court oh 2.I.05.20i'-2, 07.07.2022, 25.07 2022. T'oday, the matter is listed uncler the caption^'for disr Lissal'. Even today there is no rep,reserltati,fn on behalf of the appellant and it appears that the irppeilant is not interested in Jxrsecuting the case.

¶24

In vi, rv of the above, this Criminal Pr.t. ticrn ir; liable

¶25

to be dismissed I rr non-prosecutior-r

¶26

)

¶27

¶28

Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed for

¶29

non-prosecution. There is no order as to costs.

¶30

As a sequel, pending Miscellaneous Applications, if an1r,

¶31

shall stand closed.

¶32

//TRUE coPY//

¶33

SD/-K.SRINIVASA RAO JOlNT REGISTRAR

Jt' 1^{.."\ r} '

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Judicial Magistrate First Class (Special Mobile at Karimnagar)

¶39

2 One CC to Sri Lala Ramu, Advocate {OPUCI 3 Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad.[OUT]

4 Two CD Copies

5 One Spare Copy

TL gbr

)

HIGH^COUR-T

DATED:^0110912022

JUDGMENT

CRL.A.No'290^{of 202C}

¶49

,1
,/
.$
utI
s
I
\

¶50

DISMISSING^{THE CRI.A} FOR NON^PROSECU'ION

¶51

)
il
I7

Singirala Sathyanarayana v. The State of Telangana And Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Singirala Sathyanarayana v. The State of Telangana 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

Syed Aijaz Vs The State of Telangana

Mohd. Ahmed Vs The State of Telangana

Mr.Mohammed Basheeruddin Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammed Moiz Hussain Vs The State of Telangana

United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Nizamabad Dist. Vs Kothamandi Kishan Rao, Nizamabad Dist., and 2 Ano.

Sai Shakti Automobiles Vs Dushetty Vinod