Disposed

Sajid Pasha v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC25 Jul 2023CRLP/6620/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash FIR proceedings. It directed the petitioner to appear before the investigation officer to secure a notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., distinguishing the facts from the alleged extortion charge.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to appear before Investigation Officer by 08.08.2023 for issuance of notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C.

Sajid Pasha Vs The State of Telangana — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF JULY

¶3

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE G.ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6620 OF 2023

¶7

Between:

¶8

Sajid Pasha, S/o. Late Volihyder, Aged 41 Years, Occ. Advocate, R/o^H.No 2-8-320, Vijayapal Colony Waddepally, Hanamonda T.S.

¶9

..Petitioner/Accused No.1

¶10

And

¶11

The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Public Prosecutor,^High Court for the State of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶12

...Respondent

¶13

Raparthi Suresh, S/o. Late Agaiah, aged 54^years, Occ, Business, Ri/o^H.No. 2-5-211504, SS Residency Ram Nagr, Hanumaknda, Hanmakonda district.

¶14

...RespondenUComplainant

¶15

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memoiandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Quash the FIR in Crime No. 318. ot 2O23 on the file of P.S Kakatiya University Campus Hanamkonda, Hanamkonda district against the Petitioner /Accused No.1 .

¶16

l.A. NO: 2OF 2023

¶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 Stay of all further proceedings including arrest of the Petitioner /Accused No.1 in Crime No.318 of 2023 on the file of P.S Kakatiya University Campus Hanamkonda, Hanamkonda district.

¶18

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^{perusingthe Memorandum of} Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments^{of Sri A.Prabhakar} Rao, Represented by Sri. Chatla Madhu, Advocate for the^{Petitionerandthe} Asst. Public Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent^{No.1 and none} appeared for the Respondent No.2.

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

ITON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. ANUPAMA^CHAKRAVARTHY

¶21

CRIMINIAL PETITTON No.6620^{OF 2023}

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

This Criminal Petition is hled under^{Section482 of Code of} Criminal Procedure^(for short^{'Cr.P.C.') by the petitioner/accused} No. I to quash the proceedings in FIR^{No.3l 8 of 2023on the frle of} the Station House Officer, KUC^{Police Station, Warangal District,} registered for the offences under^{Sections420,468,471,386,506} read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code^{(for short "IPC").}

¶24

Heard leamed counsel for^{the petitionerand Sri S.Ganesh,} leamed Assistant Public Prosecutor^{for respondentNo.l} -^State. Perused the record.

¶25

It is the contention of the leamed counsel^{for the petitioner} that the ingredients of Section 386 of^{IPC are not attractedto the} petitioner herein and that if Section 386 of IPC^is deleted^{from the} F.I.R the petitioner would be entitled^{to notice under Section 41-A} of Cr.P.C.

\r.;l
\z-

On thc other hand, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the petition stating that the petitioner/accused No. I threatened the de facto complainant with dire consequences which is punishable under Section 386 of IPC and therefore, it is not a fit case to be quashed

¶30

Section 386 of IPC reads as follows;

¶31

" Extortion bv putting a person in fear of death or grievous hurt. Woever commits extortion by putting any person in fear^{of death or of grievoushurt to that person} or to any otlter, shall be punished with imprisonment oJ- either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable tofine."

¶32

On perusal of the complaint, it is evident that the documents were delivered to the petitioner by putting respondent No.2 into fear. However, the compliant does not disclose the fact that the petitioner/accused No.1 threatened respondent No.2 with dire consequences or caused any grievous hurt to respondent No.2. If Section 386 of IPC is deleted, the petitioner/accused No. I is entitled to notice under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. for the other offeqces under Sections 420, 468,, 4il and 506 read with section :+ oftPc.

¶33

¶34

In view of the above made submissions, the criminal^petition is disposed of, directing the petitioner to^{appear before the} Investigation Officer, on or before 08.08.2023.^{TheInvestigation} Officer shall issue notice under Section^{41-A of Cr.P.Cand shall} follow the procedure laid down under^{Section 41-A Cr.P.Cand} also the guidelines formulated by the^{Hon'bleSupremeCourt in} Arneih Kumar v. State of Bihart scrupulously.^However,the petitioner/accused No.1 shall co-operate with the^{Investigating} Officer as and when required by^{fumishinginformationand} documents as sought by him in concluding^{the investigation.}

¶35

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall^stand

¶36

closed.

¶37

sd/-A. AD ASSISTANT //TRUE COPY// '.0 SECTION OFFICER

¶38

To, 1 . The lll^{AdditionalJudicial FirstClass Magistrate' at Hanumakonda'} Z.fn"StrtionHouseOfficer,KUCPoliceStation'WarangalDistrict' 3. One CC to^{Sri. Sri. Chatla Madhu, Advocate [OPUC]} ;. i;; aat ttAsst.^{Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana (oUT)} 5. Two CD^CoPies. YIP

I (20r4) 8 scc 273

HIGH COURT

DATED:2510712023

ORDER

CRLP.No.6620 of 2023

1 g.E S L\I.: O 1:.
i' ,
,:) 2$a :- ) 'l
:. tl
l$ [ljB
it,;j
*y'
\l-

¶46

DISPOSING OF CRIMINAL PETITION

¶47

@c"od

¶48

Sajid Pasha v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajid Pasha 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Puli Madhavi Vs The State of Telangana

Smt. Maram Sugunamma Vs State of telangana

Sri N.Laxman Vs The State of Telangana

Bhanavath Ravi Naik Vs The State of Telangana

Lalit Parasmalji Mehta Vs The State of Telangana

Kaka , Kakarakayala Ravi Vs The State of Telangana