Dismissed

Smt.Peruvala Shobha , Shobha Rani, Hyd., v. Peruvala Niranjan Reddy, Hyd and Anr, Rep Pp.

Telangana HC20 Nov 2023CRLRC/2395/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana disposed of a Criminal Revision Case filed against an order in a Family Court matrimonial matter. Having heard counsel, the Court found the cause in revision did not survive, deeming the proceedings infructuous.

What did the court decide?

The Criminal Revision Case was dismissed as infructuous with no further orders required.

Smt.Peruvala Shobha , Shobha Rani, Hyd., Vs… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

MONDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶5

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No: 2395 OF 2017

¶6

Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 & 401 of Cr.PC against the Order dated 14.10.2015 made in M.C. No.194 of 2O14 Judge Family Court at L.B.Nagar, R.R.District as made in M.C. No.1941201 4 dated 1 4-1 O-201 5.

¶7

Between:

¶8

Smt.Peruvala Shobha @ Shobha Rani, Wo. P.Niranjan Reddy, aged 43 years, Housewife, R/o. H.No.2-4-769, New Nagole Colony, Main Road, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad-35

¶9

... Petitioner/Petitioner-Accused

¶10

AND

¶11

'1. Peruvala Niranjan Reddy, S/o Soora Reddy, aged 48years, Sub lnspector of Police, City Security Wing, Goshamahal, Hyderabad.

¶12

The State of Telangana, Rep by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad.

¶13

... Respondents/Respt.-Complainant

¶14

Counsel for the Petitioner: SR! V. BRAHMAIAH CHOWDARY

¶15

Counsel forthe Respondent No.2: NONE APPEARED

¶16

Counsel for the Respondent No.2: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶17

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶18

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL

¶19

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2395 OF 2OL7

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

The present Criminal Revision Case is filed aggrieved by the order dated 14.10.2015 in M.C.No.l94 of 2Ol4 on the file of the Iearned Judge, Family Court, at L.B. Nagar.

¶22

Heard Mr. V. Brahmaiah Chowdary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Yizarath Ali, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.2 state.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that the cause in the Revision does not survive and no further orders are required in this Revision. Therefore, seeks to dismiss the Revision as infructuous.

¶24

l,earned Assistant Public Prosecutor takes no objection to the same

¶25

Recording the submissions made by both the learned counsel, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as infructuous.

CI <br>

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

¶30

SD/- CH.^{VENKATESWARLU} DEPUW VREGISTRAR

¶31

/ffRUE COPY//

¶32

SECTION^OFFICER

¶33

TO, ' - t. fh. Judge Family Court at L'B'Nagar' R'R' District (with t.t -L t--.i,;-. -^^^-)^records if any)

¶34

One'CCto^{SRl. V BRAHMAIAHCHOWDARY Advocate [OPUC]}

¶35

r*o ccs^{to puBLlc PRoSECUTOR,High Court of Telangana,} Hyderabad^(OUT)

¶36

Two CD^CoPies

RVR/JAK

cwt

HIGH COURT

DATED:2O11112023

ORDER CRLRC.No.2395^{ot 2017}

¶42

r'-a::
/: .^ ,
! ,r
(:, 2 B t: EB .,
r)
,r5 l.'.."--t rA1': 'i"' ,.

¶43

DISMISSING^{THE CRL.R.C.}

¶44

AS INFRUCTUOUS

¶45

0"*YN

Smt.Peruvala Shobha , Shobha Rani, Hyd., v. Peruvala Niranjan Reddy, Hyd and Anr, Rep Pp.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Peruvala Shobha , Shobha Rani, Hyd., v. Peruvala Niranjan Reddy, Hyd and Anr, Rep Pp.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vadlamani Ramakanth, Vs State of Telangana

B. Sailesh Saxena, Vs The State of Telangana

K.Jitender Rao Vs The State of Telangana.,rep.,Pp

Mir Ashwaq Ali Khan, Hyderabad and 4 Others Vs P.P., State of Telangana, Hyderabad and Anr.

M/s. Sai Bhanu Rice Mills Vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Anil Krishna Chitturi, Usa., Vs Smt. Minati Chitturi and Anr, Rep Pp.