Dismissed

Ambala Ramulu and 2 Others v. Vanaparthy Rajender and Anr.

Telangana HC18 Nov 2023CRLP/5866/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR alleging civil nature of dispute. Court rejected quash, noted offences are punishable under 7 years, and directed police to strictly follow arrest procedure under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. with invigilation of Arnesh Kumar guidelines within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; police directed to follow Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and complete investigation within 3 months.

Ambala Ramulu and 2 Others Vs Vanaparthy Rajender and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32ee l

¶2

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

¶3

SATURDAY,THE^{EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER} TWO THOUSAND^{AND TWENTY THREE} PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICEE.V. VENUGOPAL} CRIMINAL PETITION^{NO:5866 oF 2014}

¶5

Between:

¶6

Ambala^{Ramu-lu, S/o.Late Mallaiah Fi/o Cheria|(V &Y.)i.Y?I1i9?l?]:t}

¶7

i. ffib;i; sri;iraa,^{s/o.Late Mallaiah R/o.cherialV&tul) waransal urst'} 5 ruii ffiaan;5,6'Lii"^{n'iiiltiruokamatavap:[tlY],Hfttt-'{,tB#3'€33'lr?ili".}

¶8

AND

¶9

1- Vanaoarthv Raiender,^{S/o.Late Nagabh-ushanam'.Fl/o'Cherial(V&M)' Warangal Dist'} i. it'iE'J'4.'P.,'Ap^{b, i P} ,^{High colrt or n e', nvooe;3u;f;ivoerursrcoruplAlNANrs}

¶10

PetitionunderSection4S2olCr.P.Cprayingthatinthecircumslancesstated in the Memoranau,^{oi e ,oundsof Criminal Petition'the High Court may be} pi"r."O i. qrush the^{FIR in Cr'No'15of 2O14 of Cherial PoliceStation'Warangal} District.

¶11

t.A. NO:¹ 0F^{2014(CRLPM P. NO:5 379 0F 20141}

¶12

PetitionunderSection4S2ofCr.P.Cprayingthatinthecircumstances stated inthe^{Memorandumof Grounds of Criminai Petition,the High CourtrnSy..be} ti, .t"y of all^{further proceedings in Cr'No'15of 2o14 of CherialPolice} ii"l*j Station, Warangal^District'

¶13

t.A. NO: 't^{oF 2022}

¶14

Petition under^{Section482 of Cr'P C praying that in the circumstances} stated in the^{Memorandumof Grounds of criminalPetition,theHigh court may be} ;i;;t;J^{to allow this intervening applicationby^lermitting the petitioner herein to} ["l.pr"ro ai^{RespondentNi.s ih originalCRLP-No-5866 of 2014'so as to} and Oefend tris^{rights lnd interest for effective adjudication of} ;;;;il;r"tect .r]o- cni.i.sa66^{0f 201a,in vieiw of the death of De-factocomplainant} V;;rp",tht^{iajender(l"trespondentin CRL P'No'5866 of 2014)'}

¶15

This Petition coming^{on for hearing,uponperusingthe Memorandumof} Grounds of^{Criminal Petitionand upon hearingthe argumentsof Ms. Krishnaveni,} learned Counsel^{representing on behalfof Sri P PRABHAKARREDDY 'Advocate} forthePetitionersandSriVizarathAli,AssistantPublicProsecutoronbehalfofthe Respondent^{No.1 and Sri Vivek Jain, appears for the Respondent No 2}

¶16

The Court made^{the following: ORDER}

¶17

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL

¶18

CRIMINAL PETITION No.5866 OF 2014

¶19

ORDER:

¶20

This criminal petition is filed by the petitioners/accused No.l to 3 seeking to quash the FIR in Cr.No.lS of 2Ol4 dated 25.01.2014 by the Cherial Police Station, Warangal Rural District against the petitioners herein.

¶21

Ms.Krishnaveni, Iearned counsel representing on behalf of Mr.P.Prabhakar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the allegations against the petitioner did not make out a case for the offences under sections 420, 468, 182, 193, 196, l2O-B read with section 34 of IPC and 156 (3) Cr.P.C., and that the rights of the parties cannot be decided through criminal proceedings, as the matter between the petitioner and defacto complainant is purely civil in nature, wherein the Tahsildar had issued memo also rejecting the application of the petitioner on 28.12.2013 vide R.C.No.812964/2013 to that extent, on the grou nd that the defacto complainant and his brother had fabricated the document in question in the said application and hence seeks to allow the criminal petidon.

¶22

¶23

Mr. Vizarath Ali, karned Assistant Public Prosecutor is present and would submit that unless and until investigation in the crime is conducted truth cannot be elicited and further submits that the sections alleged as against the petitioners^are grave in.nature and the subject matter of the crime has been pending from 2014 onwards and almost 9 long^years have been elapsed by now and also submits that the^{punishment for alleged} offences is below 7 years of imprisonment and^{therefore would} submit that the respondent-police would^{follow the procedureas} laid down under section 41-A Cr.P.C. in conducting^{investigation} and hence seeks to dismiss the criminal^petition.

¶24

Having regard to the submissions, this Court^{is of the view} that unless and until investigation^{is allowed to be continued} truth cannot be elicited. The alleged^{offencesare punishablewith} less than seven years. In the said^{circumstances,sincethe} punishment prescribed for the offences^{alleged againstthe} petitioners under section 42O, 468, 782,^{193, 196, I20-B read} with 34 of IPC and 156⁽³⁾ Cr.P.C^{are punishablewith lcss than} seven years of imprisonment,^{without going into merits of the} matter, the respondent-Police are^{directed to strictly followthe} procedure as contemplated under Section^{41-A of Cr-P.C and the}

¶25

¶26

guidelines formulated by the Hon'b1e Supreme Court in Arnesh Kumar o. State of Biharr scrupulously and to complete the investigation as expeditiously as possible, since the matter is pending from long time, preferably within three (3) months from the date.of receipt of the order of this Court. It is needless to say that, any deviation in this regard will be viewed seriously. The petitioners are also directed to cooperate and assist with the investigation.

¶27

5 Accordingly, the criminal petition is disposed of. No costs

¶28

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed

¶29

//TRUE COPY//

¶30

SD/. P. GOWRI SHANKAR ASSISTANT REGISTRARv/

¶31

SECTION OFFICER

¶32

To,

¶33

1 The Addl Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Jangaon.

¶34

2 The Station House Officer, Cherial Police Station, Warangal Rural.

¶35

3 One CC to Sri P. Prabhakar, Advocate IOPUCI

¶36

4 One CC to Sri Vivek Jain, Advocate [OPUC]

¶37

5 Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana (OUT)

¶38

6 Two CD Copies

BJLB/JAK

Pc.q,

i I I

I I

HIGH COURT

DATED:1811112023

ORDER

CRLP.No.5866 ol 2O14

1 H E TA r
(
or
oJ >..:
io 14 FEB 204 i
i ' ,t/

¶48

CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISPOSED OF

¶49

@r^c. {^J")A

Ambala Ramulu and 2 Others v. Vanaparthy Rajender and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ambala Ramulu and 2 Others v. Vanaparthy Rajender and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lakamalla Nagaiah, Nalgonda Dt and 4 Otrs., Vs State of Telangana, Rep Pp and Anr.

Koppula Ajay Kumar Vs the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp and Another

Balvanth Reddy Vs the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp and Another

Vadlamani Ramakanth, Vs State of Telangana

B. Sailesh Saxena, Vs The State of Telangana

K.Jitender Rao Vs The State of Telangana.,rep.,Pp