This Criminal Revision Case was found infructuous as counsel submitted the cause did not survive for adjudication.
The criminal revision case is dismissed as infructuous. Pending miscellaneous petitions stood closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[32es ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF OCTOBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO:928 OF 2012
. criminal Revision case filed under section 397 and 4o1 of cr.pc against the. Judgment dated 05-05-201 2 made in ca nilp.r.ro. r 89 of 2012 in tvt.c.tto."it ot 2012 on the file of the court of the Additionar Metroporitan ,no Sessionslroge, Family Court, Hyderabad.
Between:
Occ Senior B P, S Durga -Sai^P-rasad, S/o. Sri B.Satyanarayana Murthy. Au.ditor,in AGs Office, R/o_ etr.No. C_4g, nC eonny, Opp eSl Hospital, Erragadda, Yousufguda, Hyderabad.
...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT
AND
...RESPONDENTS
CRLRCMP. NO: 1455 oF 2012
Petition under section 482 cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, irre n;gr, court may be pleased to suspend the order dated 05-05-2012 passed in crl.Mp.No. 199 of'2012in M.c.No. 11 of 2012 on the file of the court of the Additional Metropolitan and sessions Judge for the Trial of JHCBB.C cum Additional Family court, Hyderabad, pending disposal of the above criminal review petition.
g
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRl. M R S SRINIVAS
Counsel for the Respondent NO.1 & 2 : SRl. H SUDHAKARA RAO
Counsel for the Respondent No.3 : SRI VIZARATH ALl, ASSISTANT PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following: ORDER
0 I
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICEE.V.VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL REVISION CASENo.928 OF 2OL2
ORDER:
. This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioner herein aggrieved by the orderinCrl.M.P.No.189of 2Ol2 in M.C.No. ll of 2012, dated05'05.2O12 passed by the learned Additional MetropolitanSessions Judge for the trial of JHCBBC cum AdditionalFamiiy Court,Hyderabad.
/ 2. Heard the learnedcounselfor the petitioner/respondent as well as the learnedAssistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent- State.
2
1 j
\
5 Recording the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant public prosecutor appeaflng for respondent_State, this Court is inclined to dismissed the criminal revision case as infructuous.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this criminal revtslon case, shall stand closed
SD/- K SAILESHI. DEPUW REGISTRAR.
//TRUE COPY//
u/'
SECTION OFFICER
To,
ADK
HIGH COURT
DATED:04/1012023
ORDER
CRLRC.No.928 ot 2012
STATE
,(,,-ie oA
q
f, ,t,:I
),C)
o [1 Jlil ?
'l
DI
DISMISSING THE CRLRC AS INFRUCTUOUS
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal revision cause survives for adjudication.
Whether the criminal revision case should be dismissed as infructuous.
Occ Senior B P
S Durga Sai Prasad
Smt B.V. Kiranmai
Baby B.Sai Subramanya Sreekari
State of Andhra Pradesh
E.V. Venugopal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
