Dismissed

V.Upender Reddy and 2 Others v. Smt v.Madhuma Reddy and Another

Telangana HC20 Jul 2023CRLRC/662/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismisses the Criminal Revision Case as abated because Petitioner No. 1, V. Upender Reddy, was deceased. The single remaining respondent, the State, took no objection to this lability. Pending matters in the case are closed.

What did the court decide?

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

V.Upender Reddy and 2 Others Vs Smt… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

I^32es I

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶6

c RIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 662 OF 2014

¶7

Criminal Revision Case under Sections 397 R/w 401 of Cr.P.C. against the Judgment dated 31.12.2013 made in Crl.A.No.85 of²⁰¹² on the file of the Court of the Judge, Family Court-Cum- Additional District Judge, at Karimnagar^Preferred against the Order^passed in dated 03.04.2012^{passedin DVC.No.6 of 2007 on the file of the} Court of the Additional Judicial Maigstrate of first Class at^Karimnagar.

¶8

Between:

¶9

1 V.Upender Reddy, S/o. V.Jagapathi Reddy, Aged about 45^years, Occ: Doctor, Present Address RYoC/o. Sai Anirudh Hospital, 3-3-200, Behind Civil Hospital, Karimnagar.

¶10

1. V.Jagapathi Reddy, S/o. Late Narsimha Reddy, Aged about 67^years,Occ: Advocate, RJo.H.No. 2-10-1223, Chaitanyapuri, Karimnagar.

¶11

V.Suguna, W/o. V. Jagapathi Reddy, Aged about 60^years, Occ:^Household, Ryo.H. No.2- 10- 1223, Chaitanyapuri, Karimnagar.

¶12

...REVISIONS PETITIONERS

¶13

AND

¶14

1 Smt V.Madhuma Reddy, Wo. Dr.V.Upender^{Reddy D/o.T.Linga Reddy} aged about 38^years, Occ Engineer, Present Address^{Ryo. FlatNo.} 106-3-5-586,^Ai r Bus Apartments, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad.

¶15

The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Cou( of^A.P., Hyderabad.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS

¶17

CRLRCMP. NO: 1062 OF 2014

¶18

Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.^praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be^pleased to suspend the order dated 31-12-2013 in Crl.A.No.85 of 2012 on the file of the Judge, Family court at Karimnagar in the interest of^justice.

¶19

Counsel for the Petitioners :SRl. BANKATLAL MANDHANI Counsel for the Respondent No. 1 :SRl VENKAT^RAGHU RAMULU Counsel for the Respondent No.2 :SRl VIZARATH ALl, ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶20

The Court made the following:

¶21

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that cetitioner No.l is no more and the relief sought for in this Criminal Revision Case is only against petitioner No. 1, therefore seeks to dismiss the present criminal revision case.

¶23

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent-State takes no objection for the same

¶24

Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is disnrissed as abated.

¶25

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this criminal

¶26

revision case, shall also stand closed.

¶27

SD/. I.TIAGALAKSHMI DEPU'IY REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

The Judge, Family Court-Cum-Additional District Judge, at Krrrimnagar.

¶32

the Additional Judicial Maigstrate of first Class at Karimnagar.

¶33

One CC to SRl. BANKATLAL MANDHANI, Advocate IOPUC]

¶34

One CC to SRl. VENKAT RAGHU RAMULU, Advocate IOPUCI

¶35

Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Trtlangana at Hyderabad. (OUT)

¶36

Two CD Copies

DL BSR g

HIGH COURT

DATED:2010712023

ORDER

CRLRC.No.662 ot 2014

" -__-1:--=-
-,r .. : IT.\TG ,i\//: \
)'r ).'-tt
?1sEP 2m ii
,l) <,i/
.

¶43

DIMISSING THE Crl.R.C AS ABATED O"flu v.6v'\s

V.Upender Reddy and 2 Others v. Smt v.Madhuma Reddy and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Upender Reddy and 2 Others v. Smt v.Madhuma Reddy and Another

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

Chinta Veera Bhadra Rao, Medchal Dt., Vs Chinta Nagabhadramani, Medchal Dt and 2 Otrs, Rep Pp.

Rajesh Mittal, S/o.Late Sri Rameshwar Das, Vs The State of Telangana

Lt. Col. a.. Pragathi Kumar, Hyd Vs State of Telangana, Rep. by P.P., Hyd and Anr.

K. Rama Rao, Hyd Vs State of Telangana, Rep. by P.P., Hyd and Anr.

Javed Razack Vs the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp and Another

Yellapragada Maruthi Aravind Vs the State of Telangana.,Rep.,Pp and Another