Dismissed

Mr.R.Ramgopal Rao v. the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp and Another

Telangana HC28 Jun 2023CRLP/10792/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana dismissed a Criminal Petition filed under Section 482 CrPC as infructuous. The petition sought to quash criminal proceedings already quashed by the same Court on a date prior to the filing of the current petition, and no stay order was required.

What did the court decide?

The criminal petition was dismissed as infructuous due to the earlier quashing order.

Mr.R.Ramgopal Rao Vs the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp and… — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32es ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT^{FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH^{DAYOF JUNE} TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY^THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{E.V. VENUGOPAL}

¶6

CRIM INAL PETITION NO: 10792 OF²⁰¹⁵

¶7

Between:

¶8

Mr.Rachakonda Ramqopal Rao, S/o. Venkat^{Rao, aged 48 years, Occ:} Business, R/o H Nd 3-7, Nalpur^(V), Of Mancherial^{Mandal, Adilabad} District

¶9

...PETITIONER/A.2

¶10

AND

¶11

1 The State Of Telangana, Rep by its Public^{Prosecutor, High Court at} Hyderabad

¶12

)

¶13

RES/COMPLAINANT

¶14

2 Mr. Shyam Sunder Baldwa, S/o Kishan Gopal^{Baldwa, Aged} about^{5Q ye-a19'} Occ BJsiness, R/o. H. No 8-404, Mancheribl^{Town, Adilabad district-504208} and also, H. No. 16 Kapil Homes, Bollarm, Secunderabad.

¶15

...RESPONDENT/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶16

Petition under Section 482 oI Cr.P^{.C prayingthat in the crrcumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Crrminal^{Petition, the HighCourt may} be pleased to^quash all the^{proceedingsrn C C No 907 of 2015 on the file of Xl} Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,^{Secunderabadto prevent abuseof} process of court and secure ends of^justice.

¶17

CRLPMP. NO: 10865 OF 2015

¶18

Petition under Section 482 af U.P^{.C prayingthat in the circumstances} stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal^{Petition,the High Courtmay} be pleased to grant stay all further^proceeding in C.C No^{907 of 2015 on the file} of Xl ACMM, Secunderabad including the appearance of the^PellA'2

¶19

This Petition coming^{on for hearing, uponperusing the Memorandum of} Grounds of criminal Petition^{and upon hearing the argumentsof sri A NAVA} MOHAN RAO, Advocate for the^{Petitioner and Public Prosecutor on behalf of the} Respondent No.1 and None^{Appeared for the RespondentNo.2}

¶20

The Court made the following:^ORDER

¶21

I I

¶22

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL

¶23

CRIMINAL PETITION No. LO792 0F 201s

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, by the petitioner/Accused No.2 seeking the court to quasl-r the proceedings in C.C. No.9O7 of 2015 pending on the file of learned XI. Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad. The cogn izance of .n hich case was taken for the offen r:e punishable undcr Section 3g I , 4O8, 42O, 5O6 read with Section 34 of the Indian penal Code, against him.

¶26

At the time when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that C.C.No.907 of 20 1 5 was tran sferred to t he Court of XXII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad, which waLs renumbered as C.C.No.l72 of '2077. It is further submitted that in the year 2O2l ,he along with accused No.l hled Criminal petition No.9g12 of 2021 to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.lZ2 ol 2077. By an order, dated 07.O2.2022, in vierv of the compromise, this Court, quashed the proceedings agaii-r st the petitioner and accused No.1. Therefore, no orders need to be passed in this Criminal petition.

¶27

The learned Assistalt^{Public Prosecutoralso fairly}

¶28

submitted that the^{proceedings against the petitionerin} C.C.No.l72 of 2Ol7 have^{already been quashed by this Court on} O1.O2.2022 in Crl.P.No.98l2 of^2021.

¶29

Recording the said submission, the Criminal^{Petition is} dismissed as infructuous as the cause in^{this CriminalPetition is} no longer survives.

¶30

Miscellaneous Petitions,^pending if^{any, shall stand closed.}

¶31

Sd/. K. VENKAIAH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

)

//TRUE COPYII

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Xl Additional chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad

¶38

Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶39

The Station House Officer, Bollaram Police Station, Hyderabad

¶40

One CC to SRI A NAVA MOHAN RAO, Advocate [OPUC]

¶41

Two CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED: 2810612023

oRoen

CRLP.No.10792 of 2015

¶50

{ i 1:-- :i l,'1 c qi.
i 14 AUE 20n
),.
. *
\i-..'':-

¶51

DISMISSING THE CRL.PETITION

¶52

AS INFRUCTUOUS

¶53

@q'o

¶54

Mr.R.Ramgopal Rao v. the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.R.Ramgopal Rao v. the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp 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

Sadaboina Venkat Narayana, Vs the State of a.P., Rep by Pp.

Mr.Gautam Bhagat and Others Vs the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp and Another

M/S. Sentini Bio Products (P)Ltd., Hyd and 2 Otrs., Vs State of Ap., Rep. Pp and Anr.

N.Hemalatha , Devapuja Aruna Vs State of a.P., through P.S., Achampet

Saurabh Arora [A.5], Vs The State of Telangana

Varre Sangameshwar Goud, R.R.Dist. Vs P.P., Hyd and Ano