Dismissed

eepathi ramachendar & another v. the State of a.P.,Rep.,Pp and Another

Telangana HC16 Nov 2023CRLP/14167/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking to quash a criminal case was filed. Counsel reported inability to contact petitioners. High Court dismissed the petition as infructuous and granted liberty to work out legal remedies.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as infructuous; liberty granted to petitioners to work out remedies available under law.

eepathi ramachendar & another Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

t^,i:.r-#f-

¶2

IN THE HIGH^{COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

¶4

THURSDAY,THE^{SIXTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY THREE}

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

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

¶7

CRIMINAL^{PETITIONNO: 1 4167 0F} 15

¶8

Between:

¶9

'1. eepathi ramachendar, Son of Mareppa, aged about^{48 years' Occ: Labour'} Caste: Beda^{BudaiaJangam'}

¶10

Komari^{Chendraiah, Son of Lalaiah, aged about 68 years'Occ:Coolie'CasJe: :} ' Hlia*ffi;]; iild;, laotn-are^{residentsof Ramhaga-r colo.-nv'H'No'8-36'} i

¶11

c[i*inv]nioad^{vlttale,Jaheerabad Mandal, Medak Districtl}

¶12

,as4.-ii.". . i #";n#i.'^+' j. -. :i . l:-:

¶13

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED^{2 nad 3 :}

¶14

AND

¶15

The state^{of A-P.,Rep-,PP,HighCou( at Hyderabad,Hyderabad' throughS'l} of Police,^{P.S.MarPallY,}

¶16

Sri. Kadamanchi^{Ramulu' S/o. Lalaiah, aged About 30 years,FyoKothlapur} Village of Marpally^{Mandal, R.R. District}

¶17

? l:,ffi' i',^$j:-5'

¶18

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS^Iii'-'N

¶19

Petitionundersection482ofcr,P'Cprayingthatinthecircumstances stated in the^{Memorandumof Groundsof criminalPetition, the High court may} u" pr"r."o to^{quash the c.c.No. 696 of 2014 on the file of Judicial First class} t: Magistrate, Vikarabad,^{R.R Drstrict.in the interestof} iustice' i:: +:ffi+

¶20

t: i:: +:ffi+

¶21

I.A N :1OF201 CRLPMP. NO: 139⁷⁷ 0F²⁰¹⁵⁾

¶22

PetitionUndersection4S2ofCr'P-Cprayingthatinthecircumstances stated in the Memorandum^{of Grounds of criminalPetition,the High courtmay} be pleased to stay^{all further proceedings in c.c.No.696 of 2014 on the file of} Judicial First Cljss^{1vlagistrate,Vikarabad,Ranga Reddy District,pending} disposal of the above^{Criminal Petition}

¶23

This Petition coming on^{for hearrng,upon perusingthe Memorandumof 1} Grounds of Criminal^{Petition and upon hearingthe argumentsof Sri P RAV1'} SHANKER ,Advocate^{for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutorfor the state of} Telangana on behalf of^{the Respondent No.'1 and none appearedfor the} Respondenl^No.2.

¶24

i ;r: -i:'

¶25

I f

¶26

THE HONOURABLE SRI JuSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL

¶27

CRIMINAL PETITION No.14167 OF 2015

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

The present Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, seeking to quash the C.C.No.696 of 2Ol4 on the f-rle of learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Vikarabad, Rangareddy District.

¶30

karned counsel for the petitioners submits that there are no instructions on behalf of petitioners and the criminal petition is pending for a long time and efforts made to contact the petitioners gone in vain. Hence, seeks to dispose the Criminal Petition granting liberty to the petitioners to ',r,orkout remedies available under law

¶31

Mr. Vizarath Ali learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent State takes no objection to the same.

¶32

Recording the submission made b5z both the learned counsel, this criminal petition is dismissed as

¶33

¶34

infructuous'^{However'liberty is grantedto the petitionersto}

¶35

workout^{remediesavailable under law'} Miscellaneous^{Petitions' pending ifany' shallstand}

¶36

¶37

closed. SD'.T.VIJAY^KUMAR ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR fir'

¶38

/ITRUE^COPY// SECTION^{OFFICER:,: .,}

¶39

,o,.,. ,n" Judicial^{First Class Magistrate, Vikarabad, R.R. District'} (ouT) .i; iiHss"'^{jTlll3ffi;ls'Jx-x:'l:"'*::ulaSfu;;o''"''nn'n"} 4. Two^{CD CoPies}

¶40

¶41

,-lt.5t-#;' ii. .r! 'mi ,?

¶42

;i.{ls1;, .f'',ir't,' .',' t

;i:'t' .{t^..-

HIGH^COURT

DATED:1611112023

ORDER

CRLP.No.1^{4167 ot 2015}

¶48

$$* rt,

¶49

ffi

¶50

1HE S14 '{
o
13 irtAfl 20?4 z
l,', .-
o,-,. .ii r; '
n:..,,...,..- ,-
.....-;!i,'.1r.'.
.?
--i:--:.--:_--.
ffi

¶51

CRIMINAL^{PETITION IS DISMISSED} AS INFRUCTUOUS ),,t .v 4

eepathi ramachendar & another v. the State of a.P.,Rep.,Pp and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

eepathi ramachendar & another v. the State of a.P.,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

B. Satya Rao Vs The State of Telangana.,rep.,Spl Pp for CBI

Bonagiri Mallaiah , Mallesh (A-1) Vs The State of Telangana

Sri Pradeep Chandra Behara, Hyd and Anr., Vs State of Telangana, Rep Pp. and Anr.

V. Kiran Kumar, R.R.Dist. Vs P.P., Hyd and Ano

V.Kiran Kumar Vs the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp and Another

V. Kiran Kumar, R.R.Dist. Vs P.P., Hyd and Ano