Dismissed

Maroju Sanyasi Rao, Vijayanagaram Dt., v. the State of Telangana, Rep Pp and Anr.

Telangana HC5 Dec 2023CRLRC/1956/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal revision case filed to quash a conviction, noting it was filed by mistake instead of a criminal appeal. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to decline the revision and file a pending criminal appeal.

What did the court decide?

Criminal revision case dismissed; liberty granted to petitioner to file a criminal appeal.

Maroju Sanyasi Rao, Vijayanagaram Dt., Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

r,iI. .-^.i

¶2

[^32ee ] t\

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶4

TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶7

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 1956 OF 2017

¶8

Criminal Revision filed under Section^{397& 401 of Cr.PC against the} Judgement daled 271021201 2 in SC^{No.87/2009on the file Of the X Addl. District} Sessions Judge^(FTC) Ranga^{Reddy District at L. B. Nagar, Hyderabad.}

¶9

Between:

¶10

Shivalayam Street, Bobbili, Vijayanagaram Maroju Sanyasi Rao, S/o Late Narsimhulu, District.^{Occ Retd., Stenogrpaher, Rl/o [r} ' &&: ...PETITIONER i

¶11

AND )

¶12

The State Of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court^{at Hyderabad} for the State of Telangana and the state of Andhra Pradesh.

¶13

Mallavarapu Veerabhadra Rao, Sio Sathyanharayana, Occ Software Engineer, Rl/o Flat No. 407, Sal Sadan Apartments, Miyapur, N/o. Rajam of Srikulam District.

¶14

...RESPONDENTS

¶15

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2017(CRLRCMP. NO: 3121 OF 20171

¶16

14r fi6! $ffi riF(

¶17

Petition under Section^'1 51 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated ; in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to condone the delay of 1834 days in filing the (Appeal against the Judgment 29O2-2O'12 in S.C.No. 87 of 2009 on the file of the X Addl. District Sessions Judge (FTC) Ranga Reddy District and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'bl Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of lhe case.

¶18

'',ffi+

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioner(s) SRI.TD Pani Kumar

¶20

Counsel for the Respondents No. 1 : SRl. Vizarath Ali , Asst. Public Prosecutor

¶21

Counsel for the Respondents No.2 :

¶22

None Appeared

¶23

: ORDER The Court made the following

¶24

:;,,
'l*r,
_.i'.rJ
ffi

¶25

t $

¶26

THE HONOURABLE SRI WSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL

¶27

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1956 of 2OL7

¶28

ORDER:

¶29

The present crimina-l re'rision case is filed under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C against the Judgment in S.C.No.87 of 2O09, dated 27.O2.2012 passed by the learned X Additional District Sessions Judge (FTC), Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad.

¶30

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

¶31

During the-course of proceedings, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submitted that inadvertently, criminal revision case has been filed instead of Iiling the crirninal appeal and due to the pending of this criminal revision case, criminal appea-l could not be frled. Therfeore, seeks to dismiss the criminal revision case by granting liberty to Iile criminal appeal

r -dtEl

l:
r -dtEl
<br>\ 'a.

l,earned Assistant Public prosecutor appearing for

¶36

respondent-State is present.

¶37

Recording the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this criminal revision case is dismissed, however, granting liberty to the petitioner to work

¶38

the alternative remedies as avaiiable under law.

¶39

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall also

¶40

stand closed.

¶41

SD/- M. MANJU DEPUW REGISTRA

//TRUE COPY//

SECTI OFFICER'

To,

l.TheXAddl.DistrictSessionsJudge(FTC)RangaReddyDistrictatL.B. Nagar, HYderabad Z. inJ Siati6n^{HouseOfficer, Miyapur PoliceStatio-n Hyderabad'} 5. On" CC^{to Sri. T D Pani Kumar, Advocate[OPUC]} ;.6; cqi"^{th" publicprosecutorHighcourt for the state of retangana[ouri} ,,' 5. Two CD^CoPies

HIGH COURT

DATED:0511212023

c
a) ; ,i
":l
s'ar- !: il
do
\ i- r
\ (

¶51

ORDER

¶52

CRLRC.No.1956 of 2017

¶53

DISMISSING THE CRL.RC.

¶54

,m$
,lI
,1
,;, j.,
il
,,
-l
{
i .r
&,':;ifu-
gffi
: -;.
i c':].l
]',.rE';
?t'sl . '

¶55

@cwf1zW

Maroju Sanyasi Rao, Vijayanagaram Dt., v. the State of Telangana, Rep Pp and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maroju Sanyasi Rao, Vijayanagaram Dt., v. the State of Telangana, Rep Pp 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

Shama Bint Moosa , Shama Tabashum Vs the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp and Another

Dodla Srinivas, Secunderabad., Vs M/S. Paras Finance Corp., Hyd and Anr.

Md.Javeed Ansari Vs the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp and Another

M/S. Ap., Media and Broad Casting Company Pvt. Ltd. and Anothers Vs M/S. Vesture Softech Pvt. Ltd., and Anothers

R.S.Ramachandra Murty, Hyd., Vs State of Telangana, Rep Pp and Anr.

Alluri Prasanna Kumar Vs The State of Telangana