Dismissed

M/s Rachana Pet v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC1 Sept 2023CRLRC/2188/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a criminal revision petition under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC as infructuous. This was because the underlying criminal case had been disposed of with a conviction and a subsequent appeal was pending, rendering the revision purposeless.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as infructuous and the pending miscellaneous petitions are closed.

M/s Rachana Pet Vs The State of Telangana — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶5

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 21 88 0F 2018

¶6

Criminal Revision Case under Section 397&401 of Crl.p.C. against the Judgment dated 22-06-2018 made in Crt.M.P.No.1029 of 2018, tN CC.No.11712016 on the file of the Court of the Special Magistrate- ll, Cyberabad at Malkajgiri.

¶7

Between:

¶8

1 M/s Rachana Pet, Represented by its Proprietrix, Smt. Bollapu Sunitha, lqctory^{at Plot No 14, Phase-ll,IDA Cherlapally,Hyderabad. R/oH.No. 10-} 7911217-303, Balaji Heights, Satyanarayana Colony, Phase l, Road No.4, Kesar Mandal, Nagaram, R.R. District 500083.

¶9

2 9mt.^{Bollapu Sunitha, Wo. Surender Reddy,H.No.10-79t12t7-303,Bataji} Heights, Satyanarayana Colony, Phase l, Road No.4, Kesar Mandai, Nagaram, R.R. District 500083.

¶10

... Petitioners/Accused

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The State of Telangana, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad Through the Station House Officer, . Kushaiahguda Police Station, Ranga Reddy District.

¶13

2 M/s Sri Balaji Pet Polymers, Represented by its Partner Sri Chitti Srinath, S/o. Chitti Ramachander Rao, age- 46 years, Occ- Business, R/o H.No. 1113-484, ll Floor, Yadava. Nagar, Alkapauri Colony, Opp. Swagath Grand Hotel, L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad 500074.

¶14

... Res po ndenUC laima nt

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. CHALLA AJAY KUMAR

¶16

Counsel for the Respondent No.1: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶17

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: Sri. N. JEEVANKUMAR

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

I I

¶20

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI CRIMINAL REVISIO N CASE No.2188 OF²⁰¹⁸

¶21

ORDER:

¶22

This revision petition is filed agairut the order dated 22.06.2018 in Crl.MP.No.1,029 of 2018 in CC No.117 of 2016 wherein the application of the revision petitioner to refer the disputed cheque/Ex.Pl for comparison with specimen signature to the hand writing expen for opinion has been dismissed.

¶23

Today there is no representation on behalf of the revision petitioner. The proceeding sheet is indicating that since 24.08.2018, none had appeared on behalf of the rev$10n Petrtroner.

¶24

N{rJeevan Kumar, leamed counsel representing respondent No.2 would submit that during pendency of this revision, Glendar C-ase No.117 of 2016 was disposed of on 18.11.2018 by recording conviction against the rev$10n petitioner. Further an appeal vide Crl.ANo.1014 of 2018 on the file of the Principal District Judge-cum-Family C-ouns, Medchal lvlalkajgiri District also been preferred and the matter is listed on

¶25

¶26

27.09.2023. Therefore, NSUe ln the revision case become

¶27

infructuors. FIe also placed the case detafu of the relevant

¶28

Criminal appeal for perusal.

¶29

Flaving regard to the reported position and as the cause in the revision does not survive for adjudication, this criminal

¶30

revision case is dismissed as infructuous.

¶31

fu a sequel, pending misce[aneou petitions, stands

¶32

closed

¶33

Sd/- M, RAMANA KRISTTNA DEPUW REGISTfrAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Special Magistrate- ll, Cyberabad at Malkajgiri (with records, if any) 2. Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT]

¶39

One CC to SRl. CHALLA AJAY KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC]

¶40

One CC to SRl. N JEEVAN KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC]

¶41

Two CD Copies

PSR

,-
!

HIGH COURT

DATED:01 10912023

1tr E s'rATS
(
v
c,J 1 3 FEB 202t
)(,1
-j('
*
D:Sr "T i:l\ i-\r!'

¶48

ORDER

¶49

CRLRC.No.2188 of 2018

¶50

DISMISSING THE CRL.RC. AS INFRUCTUOUS. 6t"fl; + q3

M/s Rachana Pet v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Rachana Pet 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

Smt. B. Soujanya Vs B. Shashi Kiran

Ek Dileep Singh Vs The State of Telangana and another

Smt. Nazmeen sultana, Vs The State of Telangana

M.J.Hameema Vs M.John Peter and another

Subrahmanyam K.B.M.V. Vs the State Oftelangana

T. Santosh Kumar Vs The State of Telangana