Dismissed

Kapu Anil Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC7 Aug 2023CRLP/7195/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana dismissed a criminal petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of an FIR. Instead, the Court directed the accused to appear for investigation while noting that offences attracting Section 5 of TS POFCSA were not examined at that stage.

What did the court decide?

Direction to petitioner/accused to appear before investigating officer on 17.08.2023; Criminal Petition disposed of without quashing FIR.

Kapu Anil Kumar Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

132s4 |

¶2

IN TIIE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA ATIIYDERABAD

¶3

MONDAY, THE SEVENTH DAYOF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE :PRESENT:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE G.ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7195 OF 2023

¶6

Between:

¶7

Kapu Anil Kumar, S/o. Nageshwar Rao, Occ. Contract Employee in GHMC, Nizamabad R/o. H.No.l0-9-43611A, Sai Nagar, Road No - 2, Vami Road, Nizamabad Town and District.,T.S.

¶8

...Petitioner/Accused No.2

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana, rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, At Hyderabad.

¶11

...Respondent

¶12

Dandamudi Venkateswara Rao, S/o. D. Raja Gopala Rao, Occ. Business, R/o. H.No.1-7-l22l2,Kamala Nagar, ECIL Post, Hyderabad- 500062. ...Respondent/De-facto Complainant

¶13

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum ol Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in FIR No.569 of 2022,Dt.1010612022 on the fire of Kusaiguda P.S., Rachakonda.

¶14

I.A. NO: 2 OF 2023

¶15

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 pleased to stay of all further proceedings including the personnel appearance of the petitioner in connection. with the FIR No.569 of 2022,Dt.1010612022 on the file of Kusaiguda P.S., Rachakonda

¶16

(

¶17

--7

¶18

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri ANIRUDH SADHU, Advocate for the petitioner, Sri S. Ganesh, public Prosecutor, on behalf of the Respondent No.l, None appeared for the Respondent No.2

¶19

The Court made the following:

¶20

¶21

l I I i I I I i

¶22

HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE G. AIVUPAI}IA CHAKRAVARTT{Y CRIMIN;AI, PETITIOII No. 7L95 0F 20/23

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

This Criminal^petiLion is filed under Section 4g2 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short Cr.p.C. J by the petitioner/accused No.2 to quash the proceedings in FIR No.S69 of 2022 on the file of file of the Station House Officer, Kusaiguda Police Station, Rachakonda District, registered for the offences under Sections 42O, 406, 506, l2ob of Indian penal Code (for short 'IPCJ and Section 5 of TSpDFEA.

¶25

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.2 and Sri S.Ganesh, learned Assistant public prosecutor for respondent No.1 - State.

¶26

On perusal of record, it is evident that the allegations leveled against the petitioner are not only under the provisions of IPC but also under Section 5 of TSpDFEA Act. But, as far as the petitioner is concerned, the question of Section 5 of TSPDFEA Act cannot be looked into at this juncture.

¶27

¶28

Since the punishment prescribed for the offences alleged against the petitioner/accused No.2 is less than seven (O7) years, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the

¶29

¶30

pctitioner/ accused No.2 t.o appear before the investigating officer on or before 17.O8.2O'23 betrveen 02,:OO p.m. and O4:O0 p.m. Tirc Investigating Oflicer is directed to follow thc procedure laid.down under Section 41-A Cr.P.C and.also the guidelincs formulated by the Honble Supremc Court in Arnesh Kumg;r v. State of Biha/ scrupulously. However, tlie petitioner/accused No.2 shatl not threaten the witness and co-operate rvith the Investigatirrg Off-rcer as and whcn required by furnishing information and documents as sought by him in concluding the investigation. Further the petitionerl accupg$ No,2 is {irected not to involvc in any other crimcs.

¶31

5 Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of.

¶32

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed

¶33

¶34

//TRUE COPYII

¶35

Sd/- T.JAYASREE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

¶36

SECTION OFFICER

¶37

To,l. The XIX Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad at Malkajgiri' 2. The Station House Officer,^{Potice Station Kusaiguda,Rachakonda.} 3. Two CCs to PUBLIC^{PROSECUTOR, High Court for the State of} Telangana at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶38

One CC ro Sri ANIRUDH SADHU^Advocate [oPUC]

¶39

$^{S. f*o CD Copies}

'(20r4)^{8 scc 273}

HIGHCOURT

DATED:07/0812023

)e it\ F SfAr/
(
?
z
c:J $5 stP2sR i

¶44

ORDER

¶45

CRLP.No.7l95 of 2023

¶46

CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISPOSED OF @co(id &e--Io$\a3

Kapu Anil Kumar v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapu Anil Kumar 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

Govinda Rao Vs The State of Telangana

Manapuram General Finance and Leasing Limited, Vs The State of Telangana

Mohammad Wahajuddin Vs The State of Telangana

Kumram Srinivas Chari Vs The State of Telangana and Another

Mukkera Sujatha Vs The State of Telangana

Kapu Anil Kumar Vs The State of Telangana