Disposed

R.Yadaiah v. The State of Telangana and another

Telangana HC27 Mar 2023CRLP/1090/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court declined to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC as prima facie allegations exist. Court was empowered to dispense with personal attendance of first four accused subject to filing of affidavit and appearing when required. No relief granted to fifth accused.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of proceedings denied. Attendance of Accused 1-4 dispensed with subject to conditions; no relief to Accused 5.

R.Yadaiah Vs The State of Telangana and another — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF MARCH rWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶5

criminal Petition No. 1090 of 2022

¶6

Between:

¶7

R.Yadaiah, S/o. Parandhamulu, Aged 64 Years, R/o. H-No.1-52, Charikonda Village, Kadthal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Presenily Rl/o.Venkateswarar Naqar, Godakondla, Chinthapalli Mandal, Nalgonda District 508 250.

¶8

R.Venkat Narayana, S/o. Parandhamulu, Aged 61 Years, Rl/o. H-No.'l-52, Charikonda Village, Kadthal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Presently R/o, Venkateswarar Nagar Godakondla, Chinthapalli Mandal, Nalgonda District 508 250.

¶9

R.Satyanarayana, S/o. Parandhamulu, Aged 59 Years, Rio. H-No.1-52, Qfalfon!.a _Vj!ag_e,^{Kadthal [Vlandal,Ranga Reddy District.Presenfly} R/o.Plot No.21 3, B.N.Reddy Nagar Colony, Vanasthalipuram, L.B.Nagai, Ranga Reddy District-500070.

¶10

R.Venugopal, S/o. Parandhamulu, Aged 57 Years, R/o. H-No.1-52, Charikonda Village, Kadthal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Presenfly R:/o.Plot No.118, Road 1-C, Christian Coibny, Haithinapuram, RangA Reddy District 500 070.

¶11

R.Ashok, S/o. Parandhamulu, Aged 52 Years, R/o. H-No.1-52, Charikonda !i!lage,^{Kadthal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. Presently} R/o.Venkateswarar Nagar, Godakondla, Chinthapalli Mandal, Nalgonda District 508 250.

¶12

. . . Petitioners/Accused Nos.'l to 5.

¶13

AND

¶14

The State of Telangana, Represented by lts Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad, Through Kadthat Police Station, Cyberabad Commissionerate, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶15

Narsing Mallaiah, S/o Maisaiah, Aged about 62 years, Rl/o Charikonda Village, Kadthal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District.

¶16

...Respondents/Defacto Complainant.

¶17

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 call for the records and quash the proceedings against the Petitioners/Accused No.1 to 5 in C.C.No.205 of 2018 on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge at Kalwakurthy.

¶18

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2t:.22'

¶19

Petilion rnder Section 482 of Cr.p.C prir,/rr.g that in the circumstances {i arec in the Memorandum of Grounds of .)rinrinal petitron, the High Court r;y be pleased to stay of all further pro.;eelings against the Petitioners//r rcused No.i to 5 in c.c.No.205 of 201J ,rn .he fire of the Principai Junior liril Judge at Kalwakurthy pending drsp,t;al of the above criminal peliiion

¶20

This Petit^(,n coming on for hearing, upon perusing tl e N4emorandum of Grounds of^(- rirninar^petition and upon hearing the: .r-gu rents of sri Kongala Mohar ()oud, Advocate for the petirioner r rnd lhe pubric Prosecutor cn bt: talf of the Respondent No..1 and .f the ir,spondent No. 2 not appearirrg in 1 ,e'son or through his counsel.

¶21

The Court made tl e following: ORDER

¶22

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶23

CRIMINAL PETITION No. LO90 0F 2022

¶24

ORDER:

¶25

This Criminal^petition is liled under Section 4g2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ,Cr.p.C.J by the petitioners/A1 to A'5 to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.2OS of 2018 on the hle of principal Junior Civil Judge at Kalwakurthy. The offences alleged against them are under Sections 447, 427,504 and 506 r/w.34 of the Indian penal Code.

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State. Perused the record.

¶27

In the charge sheet, pnma facie, there are certain allegations leveled against the petitioners. Therefore, ttris Court is not inclined to quash proceedings in C.C.No.205 of 2Ol8 on the file of principal Junior Civil Judge at Kalwakurthy, against the petitioners.

¶28

Ilo\uevel-, ;i rce the casc^{is of the} -r'e^{rr ,l() 8. thet rial} Court is cli:ec[t. I tc, complete^{the trial withrn fctrrr (4) rnor]ths} from thc dzrlc r,^. r et:cipt o[ a copv of this^{ort le I" I l i Lving regard} to the [ai:ts,^{zut,. r:ircumstallces of the case, the alterrdance of} the petitioners 1 t<; 4lAl^{to A,4 is dispensedv' 'h' u'ith the} following con(li^t tons^:

¶29

i) The atte n,lance of the^{petitioners1 to '+ /, \ 1 to A4 is} dispensed with in^{proceedingsin C.C.No.2t)5oi llOl8 on the} file of PrirLciltzr Junior^{Civil Judge at Kirlu'eL1:u rtlrl', u'hcn} representerl by heir counsel^{on record.}

¶30

ii) The ritlcttlirrce of^{petitioners 1 to} '+i,<sup>I1o A.4 is dispensed sultjt c- to hling an^{a-ffidavit by them stitlirtg that in} their absencc tl.e^{proceedings conducted b5 tht:ir counselr'"'ili} not be disputr:<l by them^{in any manneran<l shall nct dispute} theri identity a io.

¶31

iii) Howe,uer, he^{petitioners1 to 4l Alto A'l s;hall appea-r} before the learr e1 Magistrate^{as and when thert- pr:sence is} required. In 1 re t:vent^{of the petitioners' failttrr:to appear} when the Cr: u:-t directs,^{thisorder disoel.rsirrlgtheir} attendartce sha I stand calcelled.

¶32

i ti t:

¶33

irr) No such relief is granted as far as petitioner

¶34

No.5/Accused No.5 is concerned.

¶35

Accordingly, the Criminal petition is disposed off

¶36

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand

¶37

closed

¶38

Sd/- N. CHANDRA^SEKHARRAO ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR (lD

¶39

//rRUE coPY,

¶40

--^{^--} SECTION OFFICER

¶41

To, 1 . The Principal^{Junior Clvil Judge at Kalwakurthy'} 2. i,nE'si';iil"''H;i-"^{onii"r, k"jothalPolice stdtion'Ranga Reddv} District.

¶42

3 ffiEC to^{Sri Kongala Mohan Goud, Advocate} t9P991 4 il; cd io tn"^{pJor"ic prosecutor, High courrfor ihe State of Telangana} at Hyderabad. [OPUC] t'

¶43

5 Two CD CoPies

JCK

HIGH COUIlT DArED:271031201 3

¶49

ORDER

¶50

CRLP No 1090 ol 2022

¶51

,1
E: a r,, €.
t':i,1.t'
il 1 'rr,['{ 2$23
/

¶52

Disposing 01'the^(: rirninal Petition c

¶53

qn 1bIr\ur

R.Yadaiah v. The State of Telangana and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Yadaiah 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

K. Yadaiah and another Vs The State of Telangana and another

Sudhendra Baru Vs The State of Telangana

Velpula Devender Vs The State of Telangana

Korre Chandra Mouli Vs The State of Telangana

Sri. Ponnala Kalinga Reddy Vs State of Telangana and another

Nayini Srikar Chandra Vs The State of Telangana