Dismissed

Viabhav Tripathi v. The State of Telangana and another

Telangana HC22 Sept 2022CRLP/619/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought to quash a criminal case under Section 482 CrPC. The court dismissed the petition as infructuous since the investigating agency had completed the investigation and filed the charge sheet, defeating the purpose of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Criminal petition dismissed as infructuous pending if any miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed.

Viabhav Tripathi Vs The State of Telangana and another — Cheating and Forgery | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

[^325e ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 619 OF 2O2O

¶7

Between:

¶8

Viabhav Tripathi, S/o Rajendra Prasad, Proprieter of R.P World wide, Aged about 36 years, R/o. E 853 1st Avenue, Gaur City 1, Greater Noida West Sector 4, Near Kisan Chowk, Gautam Budda Nagar Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201301 .

¶9

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED

¶10

AND

¶11

The State of Telangana and another, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor, Through SHO Banjara Hills Police Station, Hyderabad.

¶12

Ashritha Annadatha, Dio A.V Murali Manohar, Age about 26 years, Occ. Entrepreneur, Fi/o Flat No.501 , Emerald Sri Sairam Manor, Pragathinagar, Yousufguda, Hyderabad-500045.

¶13

...RESPONDE NT/COMPLAI NANTS

¶14

Petition under Section 482 ot Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records^pertaining to Crime No. 1030 of 2019 of Banjara Hills Police Station, Hyderabad and quash the same against the petitioner/accused.

¶15

l.A. NO: 1OF 2020

¶16

Petition under Section 482 ot 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 of all further^proceedings including the arrest of the petitioner/accused in Crime No. 1030 of 2019 of Banjara Hills Police Station, Hyderabad.

¶17

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the^Memorandumof Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon of Sri.Velagani^Narasimhulu ,^Advocate for the Petitioner not being^present and upon hearing the^{arguments of Assistant} Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent^No.1 and^of Sri. Ravi Kiran Swamy, Advocate for the Respondent^No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER

.4 V

I \

I I I i I i tl ll t, I I

¶23

THI) HCIN'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.NA(iAR.I]J]' I RIIVIINAL PETITION No.619 of 2O2O

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This Cr iminal Petition is liled under Scction^.1821 of the Code ol-Crirrr nal Proccdure by thc petitioner-accu:;e,1 t<r quash Crimc No. 101' 0 of 2019 of Banjarer Ilills Police Stati,:lr' registered against him 1:r the offence under Sections 42O, 4O5 encl 506 of the Indian Pr'^{-ral (lode.}

¶26

'l'lrcrc s n,l reprcsentation on behall- of tht: petitioneraccuse cl

¶27

l,carnr: I Assistant Public Prosecutor h.rs subrnit,ed that subst'r1r.rcnt o filing ol the criminal petition, thc it ves;tigating agency has completed entire investigation and file d charge sheet, r,r,hich was taken on file a C.C.No.12555 l2O2(. on the file of lc;rrned Ill Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistratc, llyderabad z nd to that letter dated 03.09.2022 addressed by Sub-lnspect< r of Police, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad t<: the Public Prosecu Lor <,r the High Court is filecl .

¶28

4 . In vir w of the above submissions. si rce entire investigation is completcd and charge sheet is also filed, the \rcry purpos: of filing the crirninal petitiorl to olrasl:r Crirnt:

rl I

No.1030 of 2Ol9 of Banjara Hills police Sration is defeared and thereby the criminar petition has become infructuous and liable to be dismissed.

¶33

Accordingly, the Criminal petition is dismissed AS infructuous.

¶34

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶35

¶36

Sd/. K.SHYLESHI //TRUE COPY// DEPUTY REGISTRAR& SECTION OFFICER

¶37

To,

¶38

The lll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad

¶39

2- The Station House Officer, Banjara Hills, Police Station, Hyderabad

¶40

Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangan at Hyderabad [OUTj

¶41

One CC to SRl. V. NARASIMHULU, Advocate [OPUC]

¶42

One CC to SRl. RAVI KIRAN SWAMY BOJANAPALLY, Advocate [OPUC]

¶43

Two CD Copies

¶44

One Spare Copy AKB

?*4..'

HIGH COUR-]

DATED: 22101,2022

rl
4
c-.,
i$,
.<,
o
,.
,
')-. n

¶49

ORDER

¶50

CRLP.No,619 of 2020

¶51

DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETTTION AS INFRUCTi'OIJS

¶52

?Nq ' r+\r"'--

Viabhav Tripathi v. The State of Telangana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Viabhav Tripathi 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

Kotla Narsimha Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

R. Praveen Kumar , Praveen Vs The State of Telangana and Another

Vasarla Ashok Vs The State of Telangana

Singaraju SomaSekhar, Vs The State of Telangana

Pottabathula Shekhar , Chiranjeeni Vs The State of Telangana

Kummari Mahesh Vs The State of Telangana and another