Dismissed

Panathala Murali v. the State of Telangana and Another

Telangana HC22 Jun 2023CRLP/7835/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal petition filed under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashment of proceedings in CC No. 170 of 2015 alleging offenses under Section 498A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. Court found the matter already disposed of with acquittal by trial court, rendering the petition infructuous.

What did the court decide?

Criminal petition dismissed as infructuous since the matter under challenge has been disposed of with acquittal of the petitioner.

Panathala Murali Vs the State of Telangana and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

{

¶2

[^32ss ]

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶4

THURSDAY ,THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7835 OF 2015

¶8

Between:

¶9

PANATHALA IMURALI, S/o P. Krishna, Aged about 43 yrs, Occ Program Director, Tata ConsuLtanclr Servrces Limited, Sy. No. 115lPar1, Nanakramguda, Hyderabad, Permanent R/o. P. No. 26, Esswar Villas, Nizampet Road, Kukatpally, R.R.Dist..

¶10

...PETITIONEFYACCUSED

¶11

AND

¶12

THE STATE OF TELANGANA, represented by its Pubtic Prosecutor, High Court, Hyderabad.

¶13

Smt Sabitha Panathala, D/o B.Narayana Rao, Aged abouf.42 yrs, Flat No.201 and 2O2,2nd floor, lndra Towers, HMT Nagar, Nacharam, Hyderabad.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT

¶15

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Cnminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Quash the proceedings against the Petitioner in CC.No. 170t2015 on the file of Xlll Metropolilan Magistrate Cou(, L.B.Nagar, R.R. District.

¶16

l.A. NO: 1 OF 201S(CRLPMP. NO: 7 749 0F 20151

¶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 all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioner in CC.No. 170/2015, on the file of Xlll Metropolitan Magistrate Court, L.B.Nagar, R.R. District.

¶18

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri MOHAMMED ABDUL RASHEED, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Asst. Public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and None appeared.for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

I I

¶20

HONOURABLE^{SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL}

¶21

CRIMINAL PETITIoN Ne.Zqeq^ql29l5

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

This Crirninal^{Petitiortis filed seeking to quash the} proceedings in CC^{No. 170 ol 20 15 on the file of the le arned} XIII Metropoltan^{Magistrzrte, L.B.Nagar, Ranga ReddS'} District, under^{Sections 498 A of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of} Do,ry Prohibition^{Act, 196 I}

¶24

No reprt'sentation^{otr behalf of the learned counsel} for the petition':r.

¶25

Learned Assistant^{InLblic Prosecutor appearing lor} respondent^{No. 1-Statesu'bmits that vide judgment dated} 06.12.2017, the^{above sarcl C.C No.17Oof 2015 has been} disposed of acquitting^{thepetitioner/accu sedand} therefore, no further^{orders are required to be passed in} this Criminal^{petition.A copy of the online case status} report has been Placed^{on record.}

¶26

4 . Recording the above,^{thisCriminal Petition is} dismissed as irrfructuous.

fl ;,] :'i

Eg 'tE

Miscellaneous^{petitions,ifan1-' pending inthis}

¶32

criminal^{petition, shalt stand closed}

¶33

Sd/-N. SRIHARI ASSISTAX^REGISTRAR //TRUE coPY/t C7D

¶34

SECTION^OFFICER

¶35

To,

¶36

LTheXltlMetropolitanMagistratecourt,LBNagar'RangaReddyDistrict'

¶37

The Station^{HouseOfficer,NacharamPolice Statron' Cyberabad}

¶38

One CC^{to Sri Mohammed Abdul Rasheed' Advocate [OPUC]}

¶39

Two CCs^{to Public Prosecutor'High Court for the State of Telangana(OUT)}

¶40

,/ s lwo CD^Copies J AJ

BJLB

I I

HIGH COURT

DATED:2210612023

ORDER

1t\ E STA rE
I
<br>,, I
NR
I ?B t\Jt
(,').
<t )'

¶47

CRLP.No.7835 of 2015

¶48

CRIMINAL PETITION IS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS

¶49

Panathala Murali v. the State of Telangana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Panathala Murali v. the State of Telangana and Another

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

Yella Venkateshwarlu, Hyd., Vs State of Telangana, Rep Pp and Anr.

M.Praveen Kumar, Hyd., Vs M.Lavanya , T.Aparna, Sec-Bad and Anr, Rep Pp.

kothagundla Venkatakrishna Pulla Rao Vs Kothagundla Yagnika

Syed Zaffar Hussain Bilgrami, Vs The State of Telangana

Gudiga Raju Yadav, Vs The S.H.O., W.P.S.

Mohd.Riaz Mohiuddin,Hyd and Another Vs Public Prosecutor,Hyd and Another