High Court dismissed the criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC as infructuous after the petitioner's counsel fairly submitted that the cause no longer survives and no further orders are required. Both parties consented to the dismissal.
Criminal petition disposed of as infructuous; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, stand closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE H]GH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SATURDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 10609 OF 2014
Between:
Vadlamani Ramakanth,, S/o.Syamala Rao, Hindu, aged about 31years, Occ: Pvt. Employee, Presently residing at 12150, Richardson Street, Essendon, Melbourne, Victorial-304o, Australia, Permanent Rl/o. D.No.50-92-1413, Flat No.FS, Ekta Apartments, Shantipuram, Akkayapalem Post, Visakhapatnam16.
...Petitioner/Accused No.1
AND
...Respondents
Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.Cpraying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the HighCourt may be pleased to Quash theproceedings in C.C.No. 215 ot 2014 on thefile ofthe lll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad for the Offences U/s.420, 406, 468, 471 rlw.34 of lPC.
l.A. NO: 1OF 2014(CRLPMP. NO: 10584 OF 2014)
Petition under Section 482 ol Cr.P.Cpraying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, theHigh Court may be pleased to Stay all furtherproceedings including Appearance of thePetitioner in C.C.No. 215 of 2014 on the file of lll Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad pending the above Quash Petition.
This Petition coming on for hearing, uponperusing the Memorandumof Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing theargumentsof Ms. Kanaka Durga, Representing Smt. Deepika Gadde,Advocatefor the Petitioner and of Sri. VIZARATH ALl, Assistant Public Prosecutor onbehalf of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri Prabhakar Sripada(NotPresent) Advocatefor the Respondent No. 2
The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL PETITION No.1O6O9 oF 2014
ORDER:
The present Criminalpetition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/ accused No. 1 in C.C.No.2l5 of 2ol4 on the file of the learned III Additional chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Hyderabad (for short, "the trial Court,,).
4 Learned Assistant Public prosecutor takes no objection to the same.
1
MiscellaneousPetitions,pendingifany,shallstandclosed.
Sd/- MOHD.SANAULLAIIANSARI ASSISTANTREGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
SECTIONOFFICER
To,
PSR
Chw
HIGH COURT
DATED:1811112023
B 1HE S TA 14:
o
6(
)
:J
0 3 APB 2021
az
*t\ -li
I 9eSpATCH Eo *
ORDER
GRLP.No.10609 ot 2014
DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS.
o1 ceflta .6,r\c1-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings u/s 420, 406, 468, 471 IPC read with s.34 IPC survive to warrant quashing.
Whether the criminal petition submitted by the petitioner is maintainable given the shrunken nature of the case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vadlamani Ramakanth
State of Telangana
Pumima Ramanna
E.V. Venugopal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
