Allowed

Vallabaneni Ravi Kumar v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC28 Feb 2023CRLP/5909/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Bench quashed criminal proceedings against petitioners under Sections 270 and 273 IPC, relying on a previous common order passed in a related batch case heard by this Court. The court allowed the petition and directed that the petitioners may approach the Magistrate for the return of seized property subject to conditions regarding its expiry.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings under Sections 270 and 273 IPC in C.C.No.208/2022 quashed; petitioners at liberty to seek return of seized property from the Magistrate.

Vallabaneni Ravi Kumar Vs State of Telangana — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL PETITION No.5909 OF 2022

¶2

ORDER :

¶3

1. This Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of

¶4

Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’), is filed by the petitioners to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.208/2022 under Sections 270 and 273 IPC on the file of Judicial First Class

¶5

Magistrate, Manugur.

¶6

2. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 to 3 in the said case. The offences alleged against them are under Sections 272 and 273 o

¶7

Indian Penal Code (for short “IPC).

¶8

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

¶9

Perusal of the record would reveal that the lis involved in this

¶10

case had already been dealt with by this Court extensively vide common order dated 05.07.2021 in Crl.P. No.152 of 2020 and

¶11

¶12

batch which was reported in Mohd. Jameel Ahmed v. State of

¶13

Telangana¹ .

¶14

Therefore, this Criminal Petition is allowed quashing the proceedings against the petitioners in C.C.No.208/2022 under Sections 270 and 273 IPC on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Manugur, in terms of the common order, dated 05.07.2021 passed by this Court in Mohd. Jameel Ahmed (Supra) .

¶15

As the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed against the petitioners, the petitioners are at liberty to file appropriate application before the concerned Magistrate for return of the seized property/vehicle and the Magistrate shall consider the same in accordance with law. However, it is made clear that if the seized stock of tobacco products or other products are expired, the same shall be destroyed by taking permission from the concerned Magistrate.

¶16

A copy of the common order passed by this Court in Criminal Petition No.152 of 2020 and batch on 05.07.2021 shall form part of this order.

¶17

1 2022 CriLJ 642.

¶18

¶19

As a sequel thereto, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending

¶20

in the Criminal Petition stand closed.

K.SURENDER, J

Date: 28.02.2023 kvs

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶25

CRIMINAL PETITION No.5909 OF 2022

¶26

Date: 28.02.2023

¶27

kvs

Vallabaneni Ravi Kumar v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vallabaneni Ravi Kumar v. State of Telangana

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

Safdar Ali Mirza Vs The State of Telangana and another

Bestha Ramachadra Pankaj Vs State of Telangana

Mr. Rachakonda Ramgopal Rao Vs State of Telangana and Another

G. Narender Vs The State of Telanaga an2 Others

Shaik Mohammed Saleem , Mahaboob Vs State of Telangana and 3 Others

Smt Bhusathi Laxmi and 6 Others Vs The State of Telangana and another