Dismissed

A.Mallikarjuna Reddy , Malli , Arjun and Another v. the State of A.P. Rep., by Its Pp and Another

Telangana HC1 Nov 2023CRLRC/1421/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court permitted the accused petitioners to withdraw their criminal revision case filed under Sections 39T and 401 of Cr.P.C. The Court then dismissed the criminal revision case as withdrawn upon receipt of the withdrawal application and absence of objection from the prosecution.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the criminal revision case was granted; the criminal revision case was dismissed as withdrawn.

A.Mallikarjuna Reddy , Malli , Arjun and Another… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^329s ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

WEDNESDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶6

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO. 1421 OF 20'12

¶7

Criminal Revision Case under Sectiors39T and 401 of Cr.P.C against the Order dated 13.08.2012 in CC.No.1139 of 2O06 on the file of the lAdditional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad.

¶8

Between:

¶9

A.Mallikarjuna Reddy @ lValli @ Arjun, S/o. A.Venugopal Reddy, Aged about 30 yrs., Occ: Hardware Business, R/o. H.No.5-9-22l36, 1'' Floor, Adharshnagar, N/o. H.No. Bose Nagar Colony, Rayachoti, Kadapa District.

¶10

G.Ravi Kumar Reddy, S/o. Arvind Reddy, Rlio. H.No. 5-9-22136, First Floor, Adarshnagar, Hyderabad.

¶11

...PETITIONERS/ACCUSED

¶12

AND

¶13

1 The State of A.P Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A. P., Hyderabad.

¶14

B.Suresh Krishna, S/o- B.Sanjeeva Rao, Direcotr (Vigillance) Telecom, Monitoring,Department of Telecommunications, Ministry of Communications and lT , Govt of lndia , Rl/o. Tele Complex, Gherlapalle, Hyderabad.

¶15

...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT

¶16

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2012(CRL.R.C.M.P. NO: 2201 OF 20121

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petitron, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in CC.No.1139 of 2O06 on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, pending disposal of the Criminal Revision Case.

¶18

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶19

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to extend the interim order dt.28.8.2012 passed in CrI.RC.MP.No.22O1l2O12 in Crl.RC.No.1421 of 2012 until fu(her orders, in the interest of justice.

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI NAGESHWARA RAO PAPPU

¶21

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶22

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: -

¶23

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶24

I t

¶25

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE^{E.V.VENUGOPAL}

¶26

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.142L of 2Ol2

¶27

ORDER:

¶28

I \

¶29

The present criminal revision case is filed^to discharge the petitioners in C.C.No.1139 of 20O6^{on the file} of I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,^Hyderabad.

¶30

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners - accused as well as the learned Assistant Public^Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1 - State.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioners -^accusedupon instructions of the revision^petitioners, seeks^{permission of} this Court to withdraw the present criminal^{revisioncase.}

¶32

Permission is accorded.

¶33

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor^{appearing for} respondent No.1 - State is^present and^takes no^objection to the same.

¶34

Recording the submissions made^{by the learned} counsel for the petitioners -^{accused as well as the learned}

¶35

¶36

¶37

Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.I

¶38

-^{State, this Court is inclined to dismissthe criminal}

¶39

revision case as withdrawn.

¶40

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall

¶41

stand closed.

¶42

SD/. B. SATYAVATHI DEPUW REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The I Additional Chief^{Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad'}

¶47

The Station House^{Officer, Saifabad Police Station, Hyderabad'}

¶48

One CC to SRI NAGESHWARA^{RAOPAPPU, Advocate [OPUCI}

¶49

Two CCs to Public^{Prosecutor, HighCourt for the State of Telanganaat} Hyderabad [OUTI

¶50

Two CD Copies

MP GJP 9nq

HIGH COURT

DATED:01 11112023

1 ,"e SlAi 6
(
J
r^ ll z
0 b 'J I\ II 2C2[ c)

9ss Pl.i c<br>ORDER

¶55

CRL. R.C.N o.1 421 ot 2012

¶56

DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL REVISION CASE AS WITHDRAWN

¶57

@*^q ,:\rr-trc'

A.Mallikarjuna Reddy , Malli , Arjun and Another v. the State of A.P. Rep., by Its Pp and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Mallikarjuna Reddy , Malli , Arjun and Another v. the State of A.P. Rep., by Its Pp and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D.Sriramulu Reddy Vs S.Deepak Reddy

M. Vasu Varma Vs the State of Telangana and 2 Others

D.Sriramulu Reddy Vs S.Deepak Reddy

C. Rama Raju, Hyd Vs P.P., Hyd and Ano

B.Rajesekhar Reddy Vs C.v.Rami Reddy and Another

Syed Muneer, Hyd and 2 Otrs Vs State of Telangana, Rep by P.P.,Hyd