Dismissed

Mr. Pagidimarri Venkat Krishna S/o Ramakrishna Rao, v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Feb 2022WP/1463/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In WP No. 1463 of 2016, the petitioner sought a writ of Certiorari to quash an FIR under the SCs & STs (POA) Act and IPC. The High Court dismissed the petition as infructuous after the respondent counsel informed the Bench that a charge sheet had already been filed in the underlying case.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal of the writ petition as infructuous without costs.

Mr. Pagidimarri Venkat Krishna S/o… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

(Special Original J urisdiction)

¶3

FRIDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON'BLE DT, JUSTICE G.RADHA RANI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO:^'1463 OF 2016

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mr. Pagidimarri Venkat Krishna S/o Ramakrishna Rao,, Occ: Business, Fyo Flat No,501, SPV Apartments, Road No.5, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-rO. ...rrr,r,o*.*

¶9

AND

¶10

'1. The State of Telangana,. rep.by its Principal Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat Buildings, Saifabad, Hyderabad.

¶11

The Station House Officer,, Banlara Hills Police Station, Hyderabad.

¶12

Mr. Babu Madiga S/o M.Veeraiah,. Occ: Driver, Flat No.404, Shilpa Apartments, Road No.5, Banjara Bills. Hyderabad.

¶13

...RES'.NDENTS

¶14

Petition under Arlicle 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumslances stated^jn the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari and call for the records and quash the FIR in Crime No. 1256 of 201 5 dated 22-11-2015 on lhe file of Banjara Hills Police Station, Hyderabad, the 2nd respondent herein, registered for the offences under sections 3(i)(x) of the SCs & STs (POA) Act, 1989 and sections 506, 323 IPC as illegal, arbitrary and abuse of process of law and violative of principles of natural^justice

¶15

l.A. NO: 1 OF 20'!6(WPMP. NO: 1846 OF 2016)

¶16

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 stay of all further proceedings including arrest of the petitioner pursuanl to the FIR in Crime No. 1256 of 2015 dated 22-11-2015 on the file of Banjara Hills Police Station, Hyderabad, the 2nd respondent herein, pending final disposal of the main writ^petition Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI M. SHIVA KUMAR^(NOT PRESENT)

¶17

Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2: GP FOR HOME

¶18

Counsel for Respondent No. 3: SRI T. NAGARJUNA REDDY

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

T] IE HON'BLE DT. JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI

¶21

WRIT PETITION No.l463 of 2016

¶22

GDEB:

¶23

This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the recc rds in Crime No.l256 of 201 5 dated 22.I I .2.015 on the file of Banjr ra Hitls Police Station, llyderabad - 2"'r respondent and to quash the sa ne.

¶24

T rere is no representation by the learnc.d counsel titr the petitioner.

¶25

f :amed Govermnenr Pleader tbr Flonte submitted that charge sheet was filed in the above case and the same is nuntbered as Spl.S.C. N< .ll of 2017 and hence, the petirion has become infructuous.

¶26

Rt cording the said submission of the leamed Govemment Pleader for F ome, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No order aS to co ;ts.

¶27

¶28

Miscel aneous petitions pending, ifany, shall stand closed. SO/-K.AMMAJ| / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,/ //TRUE COPY// (' To, SECTION OFFICER 1 2 3 4 I f#fifrfla#th r,:ffi lo?y,:,",,", n^{a n} a ro u r " " 5 MBC^{i 3i! trj{;q} aa Y

HIGH COURT /

DATED: '1810212022

iv
'i *
!1
*s (-
;
r9- c,.
a i)'': i'

¶33

ORDER

¶34

WP.No.1463 of 2016

¶35

DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION^AS

¶36

c4v)
%g-'
<w

¶37

INFRUCTUOUS, WITHOUT COSTS

Mr. Pagidimarri Venkat Krishna S/o Ramakrishna Rao, v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Pagidimarri Venkat Krishna S/o Ramakrishna Rao, 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Omprakash Modani, Nizamabad., Vs Ramesh Kumar Bungh, Hyd and 36 Othrs, Rep Pp.

Dr. Himabindhu Surepally Vs State of Telangana

Thota Ashok Kumar Venkatanarayana, R.R.Dist. Vs M. Sridhar Goud, R.R.Dist. and Ano

S.Shakunthala and 3 Others Vs State of Telangana, Rep by P.P and Another

M/S.Aditya Housing and Infrastructure and Another Vs the State of Telangana and Another

Smt Sujatha Vs the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp and Another