Dismissed

Abdul Bari v. Smt Nazia Begam and 2 Others

Telangana HC28 Apr 2022CRLP/5272/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashment and stay of a maintenance order. The court observed the petitioner's consistent failure to prosecute and the absence of representation, leading to dismissal for non-prosecution.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed for non-prosecution; pending miscellaneous applications disposed of.

Abdul Bari Vs Smt Nazia Begam and 2 Others — Service and Employment | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5272 OF 2016

¶6

Between:

¶7

Abdul Bari S/o Qamaruddin, Ageg about 27 yea.s, Occ: video Grapher, R/o. 302231511, old Safilguda, Bharath nagar, tt/alkajgiri, secudrabad.

¶8

...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT AND

¶9

Smt Nazia Begam, W/o Abudula Bari, Aged about 25^years Occ : house wife, R/o. 4-463, Suraraam Colony, l.D.A, Jeedimetla, Ranga Reddy District.

¶10

Baby. Zoya Parveen, D/o Abdul Bari, Aged I months old Rep.by her mother Smt. Nazia Begam,^(the 2nd respondent being Minor rep by their^{mother And} Natural Guardian' i e' the t:: t-tEB"#ftBLNrs/pErroNERS/pErrroNERS

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep.By Public Prosecutor,^{High Court of Judicature} at H-Yderabad

¶12

...RE'P.NDENT

¶13

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the ltrlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may^be pleased to quash the order passed by the Court of the XV Additional District Judge, at Ranga Reddy district,^Dt.01-1 2-2015 in Crl.[/.P.No.213^{of 2012in} l/.C.No.31 o'f 2012.

¶14

CRL.P.M.P. NO: 6098 OF 2016

¶15

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 suspend the operation of the order passed by the Court of the XV Additional District Judge, at Ranga Reddy district, Dt.01-12-2015ⁱⁿ Crl.M,P.No.213 of 2012 in M.C.No.31 of 2012,^pending disposal of^{the Criminal} Petition.

¶16

This Petition coming on for hearing,upon^perusing the Memorandum^of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments^{of Sri Suresh Kumar} Routhu, Advocate for the Petitioner^(Not Present) and of Sri^{H.SudhakarRao,} Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 and of the Public Prosecutor on^{behalf of the} Respondent No.3.

¶17

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶18

¶19

¶20

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN

¶21

CRIMINAL PDTITION No. 5272 of 2016

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminai Procedure seeking quash of the order dated 01.12.2015 passed in Crl.M.P.No.213 ol 2Ol2 in M.C.No.31 of 2Ot2 on the fi1e of XV Additional District Judge, Ranga Reddy District, wherein the petitioner was directed to pay interim maintenance ol Rs.4,000/each in favour of respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

¶24

2, As seen from the record, no stay orders were granted by t.his Court,- as such, the main case might have been disposed of by r_his time before the trjal Court by this time.

¶25

Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 present. 4. No representation on behalf of the petitioner. Dven on earlier occasion also no ltody turned up on behalf of the petitioner. Inspite of listing the Cri;:ninal Petition under the caption^,,for dismissal,,, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. It appcars that the petitioner is not interested to prosecute his case.

¶26

In view of the above facts and circumstances, the Criminal Petition is dismissed for non prosecution.

¶27

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any,

¶28

shall stand closerl

¶29

Sd/-K.AMMAJI ASSISTANT REGI$TRAR //TRUE COPY' ,),, sEcTrotroFFrcER

¶30

To, 1 The XV Additional District Judge at Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar. 2 One CC to Sri tiuresh Kumar Routhu ,Advocate^(OPUC) 3 One CC to Sri lj.Sudhakar Rao,Advocate (OPUC) 4 Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana Hyderabad (Ot T)

¶31

1. Two CD Copies ks

${.

HIGH COURT

DATED:2810412022

ORDER

GRLP.No.5272 of 2016

s
s"
<br><br>

DISMISSING THE CRL.P FOR NON PROSECUTION.

Abdul Bari v. Smt Nazia Begam and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Bari v. Smt Nazia Begam and 2 Others

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

Yadagiri Tadem Vs the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp and Another

Surukunta Sai Reddy alias S.Sai Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Begari , Avula Shyam Vs The State of Telangana

K.R.Janardhan Vs the State of Telangana and Another

Mr.Althi Veerendra Nath Vs State of Telangana

Are Subhash Goud , Are Subhash Vs M/S.Lucky Restaurant and Anr.