Dismissed

Pannala Govardhan Reddy v. Smt. B.Laxmi

Telangana HC23 Sept 2022CRLP/1256/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the Criminal Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C for being infructuous. The court noted that the trial court in the main case (C.C.No.938 of 2014) had already disposed of the matter on 24.06.2021 by acquitting the accused, rendering the petition to quash earlier orders purposeless. Pending miscellaneous petitions were also stayed.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Petition was dismissed as infructuous. Pending miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed.

Pannala Govardhan Reddy Vs Smt. B.Laxmi — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

[^325s ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY,THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1256 OF 2020

¶7

Between:

¶8

I Pannala Govardhan Reddy, s/o P.Narsimha Reddy, aged about 47^years, occ. Business r/o Flat No. 306, B Hima Sai Poojitha Apartments, Doctors Colony, Saroornagar, Hyderabad.

¶9

...PETITIONER (Defacto Complainant)

¶10

AND

¶11

Smt. B.Laxmi, Wo S.Sanjeeva Reddy, Aged about 55 years, occ. Housewife r/o H.no. 2-2-2018,15,1-6A, Dugabhai Deshmukh Colony, Beside Raja Rajeshwari Builders Lane Hyderabad.

¶12

S.Narsi Reddy, S/o Srinivas Reddy, aged about 50 years, Occ. Business, r/o H.No. 4-7-87, Near Canara Bank, Main Road, Hayathnagar, R.R.District.

¶13

K.Anji Reddy, S/o K.Narsi Reddy, aged 49^years, r/o H.No. 4-7-211|D, Padmvathi Colony, Hayathnagar, R.R.District.

¶14

S.Sanjeeva Reddy, S/o Srinivas Reddy, aged 60 years, occ. Govt. Servant, r/o H.no. 2-2-20lBl5 1-6A, D.D.Colony, Beside Raja Rajeshwari Builders Lane, Hyderabad.

¶15

,..RESPONDENTS

¶16

(Respondents/Accused Nos. 1 to 4)

¶17

The State ofTelangana, Through Saroornagar P.S., Rachakonda rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.

¶18

...RESPONDENT (Petitioner/ComPlainant)

¶19

Petition under section^{482 of cr.P .c praying that in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum^{of Groundsof criminal Petition, the High courtmay be} pleased to i) allow the Quash^{Petitionbv selting asidethe order passedin} bn.U.p.tto. ileZ d^{2019 in C.C.No.938 of 2014 dt. 27-1-2O2Oon the file of the} Judicial Magistrate^{of First class, specialMobile court-cum-Vl Addl. Junior civil} .lrOg"-"rr-Vr Addl.^{Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L"B'Nagar, ii) And to} grarit such other order or^{ordersas this Hon'ble Court deems fit'}

¶20

l.A. NO: 1OF 2020

¶21

Petition under S =clion 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in t'e circumstances stated in the Memoran( um of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the^-l gh 3ourt may be pleased to grant stay o all further proceedings in C.C.No. 938 ol 2C14 on the file of the Judicial Magistre .e of Firt Class Spl Mobile Court-cum-\ I Adcil. Junior Civil Judge-cum-Vl Addl. M itropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L .ti.Nagar, pending disposal of the above rr vision.

¶22

This Petition co ning on for hearing,upon perusing th 3 Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal F etition and upon hearing the argumer ts of Sri KUNCHA SUNIL GOUD, Advoca e for the Petitioner and of the Additiorrz I l)ublic Prosecutor on behalf of the Respo rdent. r,.lo.5 '

¶23

The Court made the fr ilowing: ORDER

¶24

THE HON'BLE DR. ..'USTICE D.NAGARJUN

¶25

CRIMINAL PETITIoN No.1256 of 2O2O

¶26

OR.DER:

¶27

This Criminal Petition is hled under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the petitioner-de-facto complainant challenging the orders dated 27 .Ol.2O2O in Crl.M.P.No.2783 of 2019 in C.C.No.93B of 2OL4 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class - Special Mobile Court- Cum - VI Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at L.B.Nagar, wherein the petition filed by the^{petitionerunder} Section 31 1 of the^{Code of CriminalProcedure was dismissed'}

¶28

Learned counsel^{for the petitionerhas fairly submitted} that subsequent^{to the filing of the criminal petition' the main} case itself^{has been disposed of' wherein the accusedwere} found not^{guilty of the charges leveled againstthem and they} were acquitted'^{LearnedAssistantPublic Prosecutorhas} submitted^{copy of the proceeding sheet downloadedfrom e-} courts,^{which discloses that the trial Courthas disposed of} C.C.No.938^{of 2014 on24'06'2021'}

¶29

In view^{of the abovesubmissions'since the main case has} arready^{beendisposed of, the very purposeof Iiling the criminal}

¶30

,, ,r/

¶31

¶32

petition^{to quaslorders dated 27 'OI'2O2Oin Cri M'I''No '2''/83 of} 2019 in^{C.C N r'938 of2Ol4 isdefeated andrereby the} criminal^{petitic n has becomeinfructuous and[i rl'rle to be} dismissed.

¶33

ci;rrtis:'cd AS 4. Accordin ilv,^{the Criminal Petition1s}

¶34

infructuous.

¶35

Asase,tuel,themiscellaneousPetitions'perdingiifany'

¶36

shall stand^{cl, sed}

¶37

SD/'. P.PTI),,IANABH DDY ASSIISTANT TRAR //TRUE COPY//

¶38

sE(]Tt FFICER

¶39

To,

¶40

The Judicial M rgistrate of I Class, Special Mobile Courl c;um '/l Additional Junior Civil Ju, lge cum Vl Additional Metropalitan Magrsh'irte, Cyberabad at LB Nagar.

¶41

Two CCs to th : Public Prosecutor, High Court for the Slate o1 Telangana at Hyderabad [O JT]

¶42

One CC to K.{ unil Goud, Advocate [OPUC]

¶43

Two CD Copir s

¶44

One Spare Cc:y

'Tn

HIGH COURT

DATED:2310912A22

ORDER

CRLP.No.125t, ot 2020

¶51

z4:'- <br>1 :r,'
/at
,J ,,: L
a,)
$r
.b Fil
f- .l* ;: il
cA s'.i
.{.
tr tro

¶52

DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION AS DEFAULT

¶53

@
4ic
\o*

Pannala Govardhan Reddy v. Smt. B.Laxmi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pannala Govardhan Reddy v. Smt. B.Laxmi

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

Singaraju SomaSekhar, Vs The State of Telangana

Viabhav Tripathi Vs The State of Telangana and another

Pottabathula Shekhar , Chiranjeeni Vs The State of Telangana

Kavvampally Durgaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Koppula Vijay Bhaskar Reddy Vs State of Telangana

Pannala Govardhan Reddy Vs Smt. B.Laxmi