Disposed

Chine Balakrishna v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC19 Jan 2023CRLP/7234/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of Criminal Petition under Section 482 CrPC filed by accused seeking quashing of proceedings under Sections 307, 34 IPC. Court refused to quash proceedings, finding privacies involved, but dispensed with personal attendance of petitioners in trial.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; attendance of petitioners dispensed with subject to affidavit; other drafts pending, if any, shall stand closed.

Chine Balakrishna Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

t^{3251 l}

¶2

¶3

oF TELANGANA rN rHE^H|GH "orl{3}otJtoBt#E

¶4

rHURSDAY,HnrExrilS',^t-tJl[g$I""f,]#1',^-"

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICEK'SURENDER}

¶7

CRIMINA^{L PETITION NO:7234 OF2022}

¶8

Between:

¶9

Between: ^^{a.^ -r^.}

¶10

1. Chine Balakrishna,^{S/o.Ramallingam,Age 49 years' Occ'.Attender'tn} Medchal Diskict court, R/o.16-1-30,^{Saidabad Colony,Hyderabad'}

¶11

Smt. Chine Padma, Wo.Balarishna,^{Age 45 years' Housewife, F/o'16-1-30'} Saidabad Colony, Hyderabad.

¶12

...PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED^{NO.1& 2}

¶13

AND

¶14

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

¶15

Smt. Kaveti Vaani, Wo.Vidya Bjhushan, Age 32 years, Occ. pvt. Job at Navrang, Venkateswara Khama, Saidabad, Hyderabad.

¶16

...RESPONDENT/ DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶17

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.p.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Crimi nal Petition the High Court may be p leased to call for the records in C.C.No.1 432812021 on the file of the XVll Additional Metropolitan Ma gistrate, Nampally. Hyderabad and quash the same is abuse of process of law and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and p roper in the circumstances of the case l.A. NO: 1 0F 2022

¶18

Petition under Section 482 0f cr-p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds "i ci-il"ri"titron, the High court may be pleased to grant o", :j . jl,^^t.r,il; pr";eeiings rncruding the arrest and appearance of the petitione rs/accused No.1 and 2'in c c. No1432gl2o21 0n the file of the XVI Additionar uetroporiian til;g;r,r;:N"mpaily, HyderaUaO penOing disposar of this criminal .petirion "il ;;#il; oth", ord",. or orders as this Hon'bte court may deem fit ano properiritn-e-"irlirJtrn.u, of the case.

¶19

This^petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri BAND, sAr vAMSHl, Advocate for the petitioner and the "proti, pro.".rtor on beharf of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No.2.

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

I I

¶22

( (

¶23

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^K.SURENDER

¶24

CRIMINAL PETITION No.7 234 0F²⁰²²

¶25

ORDER:

¶26

This Cnminal^{Petition is filed under Section482 of the Code} of Criminal^{Procedure, 1973(fot short'Cr'P'C'')by the petitioners-} Accused^{Nos'l & 2 to quash the proceedingsagarnst them in} C.C.No.1432B^{ot 2O2l Pending} on the^{file of XVII Additional} Hyderabad'^{The offences} NamPallY, Magistrate, MetroPolitan 509,^{506 and 323} aleged^{against the Accused are underSections} r lw^{.34 of the lndianPenal Code'}

¶27

and^learned learned^{counsel for the} petitioners 2. Heard Perused Additionai^{PubiicProsecutor forthe resPondent-State '} the^record'

¶28

In the^{chargesheel' pima facie' tbereare certainallegations} 3. leveled^{againstthe petitionersherein' They are triable issues'} The^{petitioners have to face trial and'::::t} :t.:"** '"^:: defences^{taken bY the petitioners cartnot} Section^{-t:::^::.} #' apprication^fi1"d '"d"' .--"-;is not^{inclinedto quash the proceedingstn} pending^{on the file of XVI1 Additional Metropolitan Magisrate'} Nampally'^{Hyderabad'against the Petitionersherein'}

¶29

Jat'''

¶30

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Criminal Petition is disposed ofl with the following directions:

¶31

i) The attendance of the petitioners/A1 & A2 is dispensed with in C.C.No.14328 of 202 1 pending on the file of XVII Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, when represented by their counsel on record.

¶32

ii) The attendance of the petitioners is dispensed subject to filing an affidavit by the petitioners stating that in their absence '.he^{proceedingsconductedby their counsel w,ill not be disputed} by them in any marrner and shall not dispute their identity also. iii) However, the petitioners shall appear before the learned Magistrate as and when their presence is required. In the event of the petitioners failure to appear when the Court directs, this order dispensing their attendance shall stand cancelled.

¶33

Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶34

SD/. A.V.S. PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR /ffRUE COPY// (1t r <

¶35

SECTIOhTOFFICER

¶36

To,

¶37

Vll Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad. 2. Station House Officer, Saidabad P.S., Hyderabad.

¶38

One CC to SRl. BANDI SAI VAMSHI, Advocate [OPUC]

¶39

Two CCs to PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶40

Two CD Copies KAR

HIGH COURT

DATED:1910112023

L ST Tt
A
q
-l
$ $ t'rB Ntl
/'

¶45

ORDER

¶46

CRLP.No.7234 of 2022

¶47

DISPOSING OF THE CRLP

¶48

g
?/K

Chine Balakrishna v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chine Balakrishna 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

Syed Jaffar, Vs the State of Ap Rep by Its Pp Hyd.

Md.Ghouse , Vs State of a.P., Rep by Pp.

Manusaran Reddy Vs Smt. Battu Vasantha

Tholem Sambaiah Vs the State of A.P. and 54 Others

Panjala Rajeshwari Vs The State of Telangana

Gunti Revathi Vs The State of Telangana and another