Disposed

M.Satya Sri v. the State of Telangana

Telangana HC23 Nov 2023CRLP/5719/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order disposes of a criminal petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashment of an order. The court adjourned the matter in previous proceedings due to the petitioner s counsel becoming a judge, as no alternate arrangements were made. Lacking status of the calendar case, this court disposed of the matter with liberty to approach if cause survives.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court if cause survives.

M.Satya Sri Vs the State of Telangana — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2023)

;...,.

&:t i I

13251 |

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA ,'.^.l.i : ..1lt;t THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY AT HYDERABADTHIRD DAY OF NOVEMBER ta *O THOUSAND AND TWENry THREE . 't-': tr.q.il ,] 'i,.. )& : ..: |:f . '| PRESENT ii' .-t t THE HONOURABL E SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5719 OF 2018

¶6

Between:

¶7

-.. r| .&.,i ,M.Satfa Sri, Wo. Ajay P. Mathew, R/o. Flat No.302, Megatara Residency, Chitrapuri Colony; Khajaguda, Hyderabad.

¶8

..,PETITIONERYACCUSED

¶9

AND.:

¶10

"'r. 1.^THE STATE^OF TELANGANA,^{rep by} the^{Public Prosecutor,} High Court at Hyderabad

¶11

Ajay P.Mathew, Rl/o. D No.67, old, 41 New ATT Colony, Near Kerala Club, Tamilnadu State'

¶12

":yoftott, ...RE''.NDENTS/..M'LATNANTS

¶13

l'^,.J

¶14

.*l&^petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances ;.siii6a.in^{the Memorandum of Grounds} of^{Criminal Petition,} the High Court may be iipleaset,to call for the records and quash the order dt.03-04-7018 passei in Crl.MprNo.1006 of 2018 in C.C.No.798 of 2016 on the file of the Xlll Addl, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Mahila Court) at Hyderabad.

¶15

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2018

¶16

,^{Petition under Section482 of Cr.P.C praying that in thecircumstances}

¶17

,.' statbdiin the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleaseb to permit the petitioner to en-cash and receive the amouni of

¶18

. Rs.12,50,000 (Rupees twelve lakhs and fifty thousand only) deposited by the 2nd ReSirondent vide FDR No. 208486 dt.28-12-2}16 in Compliance of the orders of the High Court in Crl.P No. 10683 of 2016 pending disposal of the above Criminal

¶19

'Petition:

¶20

¶21

r:. ':{.,;rThis Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of 'Giolnds^{of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the argumentsof Sri NANDA} 'LEGA&AID, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Addl Public Prosecutor on behalf .of the Respondent No.1 and of Sri I Gopal Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent No.:2 .a

¶22

lhe C6urt made the following: ORDER I

¶23

¶24

{ t

¶25

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶26

CRIMINAL PETITION No.5719 OF 2018

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

This Criminal Petition is frled under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner seeking to quash the order dated 03.O4.2O18 in Crl.M.P.No.1OO6 of 2018 in C.C.No.798 of 2OL6 on the file of the XIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Mahila Court) at Hyderabad

¶29

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State and perused the record.

¶30

The petitioner is questioning the dismissal of the petition filed by her against accused No.1 vide Crl.M.P.No.10O6 of 2O18 in C.C.No.798 of 2016. No interim orders were passed when the petition was filed. The status of the Calendar Case before the trial Court is not known. The counsel on record for the petitioner was elevated as a Judge of this Court. No alternate arrangements were made by the petitioner.

¶31

In the said circumstances, the fate of the Calendar Case in the trial Court is not known. Hence, this Court is not inclined to keep this petition pending.

¶32

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed off,^granting

¶33

liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court if cause survives.

¶34

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶35

¶36

:l!
f+I
,.|lt
:.ii

¶37

SD/. V.HARI PRASAD ASSTSTANT BE€TSTEAR //TRUE COPY// >',,.V

¶38

SECTION OFFICER

¶39

To,:

¶40

TheXlll Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate^(Mahila Court)^{at Hyderabad}

¶41

The Station House Officer, CC Police Station,^Hyderabad. -i

¶42

One CC to Sri S. Nanda Legal^Aid, Advocate [OPUC] , i. I +l

¶43

Two CCs to Public Prosecutor,^{High Court for} the^{State of Telangana} (our) **i

¶44

Two CD Co^pies .:: BJLB NS +,, fiqr 1,6oFL^{ReoDY,al,"oJafoeu']}

¶45

6 ;.! 1t f.$

¶46

H GH COURT
',,: iti j .._. rlr" I 4l .'r- :t J '.'I a
+ - -j|,::l:.-.,.:- t .,., -
- _Y;i- ii:5 q- xat : ili :4 .; X
-+ E .r. -__r.:" i.ii i1:t
I '.,' ir r ;"#F;:1f$ :f $'
T . t'.: * :: 4
+, ',.1 ?i 1
t1
:
d,,l
fr 1;
7
DATED:2311112O23
.n ,'
tI
t:
oRD ;iY
it;:t. ERi t:
I nr.
.h ,.
* {ii l-' I l.' E} 1
lr'i.+. I
s+
CRLP.No.5719 of 2018 I i
fi'r
:;; +rI l.rI' ,{,lt, +{'' T
,Ir ,t
J
,. i,
-tr''!.
{ ..', 'ktL::
CRIMINAL PETITION .s
.1.,
sro+ L
o
<br>i.t ,F ,e

¶47

1 r,rE STATG:
{t
5o 1S JAN 2$2I a
d+
*
I
Des pxrcil

M.Satya Sri v. the State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Satya Sri 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mangi Venkata Swamy Vs Mohd. Ghouse

Ahmed Mohiuddin, Vs The Sttate of Telangana

K. Ravi Prakash Reddy Vs K.Rakshitha , Jyothi and 3 others

Shirish Nagari Vs The State of Telangana

K.Veereshwar Vs State of Telangana

Thota Parameshwar Surya Chandra Rao and Another Vs The State of Telangana and Another