Dismissed

Bharath, Mbnr Dist. v. State of Telangana, Rep. by P.P., Hyd and Anr.

Telangana HC6 Jul 2023CRLP/7476/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash proceedings under the SC/ST Atrocities Act, observing that since the charge sheet was undisputedly laid before the Special Judge, the petition no longer survived for adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition No.7476 of 2014 was dismissed. Petitioner is at liberty to work out remedies as available under law.

Bharath, Mbnr Dist. Vs State of Telangana, Rep. by P.P… — Caste Atrocities | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^32se ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSD-AY, THE SIXTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSANO eNo rwrrvw ll"nee

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶6

IT o 6 L4

¶7

Between !

¶8

Rii'1"i;rfl"i5i'i,5f,litli';;,#113311]n^{vears, occ:srudenr} (discontinued),

¶9

AND

¶10

,.. PETITION ER/ACCUSED

¶11

State of Telangana, S"p. OV. its public prosecutor through the S.H.O, police srarion, Shadnagar MahabuonaqiiDlri;i.^-",

¶12

Vadta Akhit, S/o.l

¶13

nr ". q - r 0,' i. it .i1 "";Ti gff l?". E 3.",0, j"00"",i,, "^{li rliH;} "^{ffi )."f ,, f l.? ",}

¶14

.., RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶15

Petition under Section 4g2^of Cr.p.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum..of Ground, "1^{Zriri"ifpetition, the Hiqh Court} may be pteased to quash the .proce;Jin9r-in'i.i.a.,ro. 274/2074 r;sistered under Section 3(1)(x) of the sctreo'ule cari" una Schedule Tribes ( rhe^prevention of Atrocities) Act, rggs o" *'"-iir" of station Head officer ISHo], Police station. shaonagar,' un-o-ei ir," lrriroi"i"n of the court of the Additional Judiciar First crass r"r-agistratj si'ai;lg"., Mahbubnagar District.

¶16

¶17

P a o

¶18

Petition under Section 4g2- of Cr.p.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Groundr " r ?.iilir""r petition, the High Court may be pleased stay of all further pi.." a i"g;;i" vestig a tio ns includinq the arrest of the petitioner .in F.I.R.No.27i/2oii-'on tne Fite of SHo, potice sration, Shadnagar, Mahboobna!ai-oi;tri.i'plnainq disposar of above criminal petition.

¶19

I.A. NO: 1 OF 2O18

¶20

Petition under Section 4g2^of Cr.p.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Groundr "] t.iri"ir perition, the High court mav be preased to vacate the interim sLy9;;i;;"rn crr.p.M.p.No .6988/2014

¶21

in Crl.P.No.7476 c . 014 on the file of the Hon'ble High Courl. at Hyderabad dated 10.07.2 014.

¶22

This Petition oming on for hearing, upon pertrsing lhr: Memorandum of Grounds of Crir nal Petition and upon hearing I hr: 3rguments of Sri B.Narasimha I ,rrma, Advocate for the^petitioner .rr d sri Vizarath Ali, Assistant Public 'T)secutor on behalf of the Res,pondent No.1 and Dr. J.Vijayalakshm Advocate for the Respondent No.2.

¶23

The Court made t e following: ORDER

¶24

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E. V.^VENUGOPAL

¶25

CRIMINAL PETITION No.7476 OF 2OL4

¶26

ORDER:

¶27

This criminal petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR.No.274 of 2O74 registered under Section 3(1)(x) of the Schedulde Castes and Scheduled Tribes^(The Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989(for short^'Act') on the^file of Station House Officer[SHO], Shadnagar, Police Station,^{under the} jurisdiction of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Shadnagar, Mahabubnagar District.

¶28

The brief facts of the case are that the^petitioner herein had lodged a complaint before the Station House Officer, Shadnagar Police Station and basing thereon the^{policeregistered} a^case in FIR.No.274 of 2014 for the offences^{punishableunder} Sections3(1)(x) of the Schedulde Castes and^{ScheduledTribes} (The Prevention of Atrocities) Act. This- Court had granted an interim stay in Cr1.M.P.No.6988 of 2014, dated IO.O7.2Ol4 fot^a period of six (6) weeks and later on 3O.12.2OL4, the same has been extended till 19.02.2015. Thereafter the matter^{was listed} on 20.O6.2023, 2LO6.2O23 and 28.06.2023 and recorded^the

¶29

¶30

appearance o learned^{('ounsL'l for the pel-ition'rr arld learned} Assistant Pub.^{c Proseclrtor appearing for responrl'rrr t- Sitate'}

¶31

Later on it was brought^{to the notice of} 'h^{is Court that} while the sta, uas^{persistir-rg as rvell,the chargeshe':t was laid} before the lear rcd Special^{Judgelor Triai of cases;ultdr:r SC's and} ST's (POA) Act 19t]9,^{Mal.rabubnagar,that clearl'y er;tablishesthe} conspicuous a^{tion on the part of the responrlents}

¶32

Learlred \ssistant^{Pr-tblic Prosecutor,on inst'ttcti:ns,would} submit that tl^r subject^{Inatter of the criminalpetil-ioll hasbeen} disposed of b\ S;pecial^{.Iudge for Trial of cases tLnder SC's and} ST's (POA) A(, 1989^{cum-ll Additional Distritlirnrl Sessions} Judge and th^{itature ol disposal was uncont€:s te d-l'ransferred} due to reorga rization^{of judicial districts. Therefore, seeks to} dismiss the cr: ntnal Petition.

¶33

Recordin r the submissions^{made by the l<:arnt:d counsel} appearing on^lroth sides^{and uponperusing r:he irLstructions} submitted b.y ;'irtred^{Assistant PublicProsecutor anC material} placed on rec, rrl, this Court^{is of the view tha[ no"v itis an} undisputed fa t that thc^{charge sheet has been. laid beforethe} Court concern d and^{therefore,the causein the present criminal}

¶34

petition does not survivc for adjudication and therefore, this

¶35

criminal^pe tition is liable to be dismissed.

¶36

Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed. However, it is needlcss to mention that the petitioner^is at liberty to^work-out

¶37

the remedies as available under law.

¶38

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed

¶39

¶40

Sd/- C. PRAVEEN KUMAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / lrRuE^coPY/ / Ab

¶41

SECTION OFFICER

¶42

To,

¶43

The Additional ludicial^{First ClassMagistrate,Shadnagar, Mahbubnagar} District.

¶44

The Station House^{Officer (S.H.O), PoliceStation Shadnagar} Mahabubnagar District.

¶45

One CC to SRI^{B. NARASIMHASARMA, Advocate[OPUC]}

¶46

one cc to sRI DR.J.^{VI.IAYALAXMIAdvocate} [oPUC]

¶47

Two CC to PUBLIC^{PROSECUTOR,HighCourtfor the StateofTelangana} at Hyderabad. [OUT]

¶48

Two CD copies.

¶49

STB }* kam

¶50

HIGH COUR T

¶51

DATED:O6 ,l r )'/ 2023

¶52

ORDER

¶53

,<r: 1gE ST4 ,€
/,
/,'.,
ti(',?
l!t'
._ t,
Itc . ? 4 AU8 2$A
;.i
.,
.t l/'
'.i . '..<f-'

¶54

CRLP.No.74) 6 of 2OL4

¶55

CRIMINAL PI TITTON IS DISMISSED.

¶56

tcr\ .tr:c-----
__/, ie?5

Bharath, Mbnr Dist. v. State of Telangana, Rep. by P.P., Hyd and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharath, Mbnr Dist. v. State of Telangana, Rep. by P.P., Hyd and Anr.

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

Mohd. Irfan Mohiuddin, Hyd Vs State of Telangana, Rep. by P.P., Hyd and 5 Othrs

G.Naveen Kumar Vs G.Sudha Rani and 2 Others

Mir Qamar Hasan Razvi, R.R.Dt., Vs State of Telangana, Rep Pp and Anr.

Bhadrappa , Bhadranna Vs Penna Cement Industries Ltd., and Another

Tameezuddin Ahmed and Another Vs the State of Telangana and Another

Manoj Tiwari, Chhattisgarh., Vs State of Telangana, Rep Pp and Anr.