Allowed

Korri Sai Sumant v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC4 Sept 2024CRLP/10297/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal petition quashing the trial court's order that allowed a complaint under Section 173 Cr.P.C. The trial court was remanded to decide the matter after hearing both sides and recording reasons.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 23.04.2024 allowing the petition in Cr.M.P. No. 341 of 2023 was set aside; the trial court was directed to decide the petition after hearing both sides and recording reasons.

Korri Sai Sumant Vs The State of Telangana — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶2

AT HYDERABAD

¶3

WEDNESDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER

¶4

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶7

CRIMINAL PETITION NO:10297 O F 2024

¶8

Between:

¶9

Korri Sai Sumant, S/o. Ramesh, Aged about 4b years, Occ. Student, R/o.H.No. 9-46, Yellareddypet Village and Mandal, Rajanna Sircilla District, Telangana.

¶10

...PETITIONERYACCUSED NO.4

¶11

AND

¶12

1- The State of relangana, rep.by its public prosecutor, High court for the state of Telangana. at Hyderabad.

¶13

...,.RESPONDENT

¶14

Kolha fi/allaiah, S/o. Baraiah, Aged about 65 years, Occ- Agricurturist, R/o.H.No.9-46, Yellareddypet Viilage and lr/andar, Rajanna sirciila District, Telangana.

¶15

...RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶16

Petition under Section 528 of B.N.s.S. praying that in the circumstances stated in the lVlemorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in crl.p. No. 341 of 2023 of cr.No. 215 of 2022, on the file of Hon'ble I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First class, at Sircilla.

¶17

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2024

¶18

Petition under section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the fMemorandum of Grounds of criminal petition,the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in cRL.lVl.p. No. 34'l of 2023 in cr. No. 215 of 2022, on the file of Hon'ble, I Addl. Judicial tvagistrate of First class, at sircilla, including appearance of the petitioner, pending disposal of the above cnminal petition.

¶19

This Petition coming on for hearing,upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri tvADAS BHARATH CHANDRA ,Advocate for the petitioner and the public prosecutor (TG/AP) on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and none forthe Respondent No- 2. The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

THE HON'BLE^{SMT.JUSTICEK. SUJANA}

¶21

CRIMINAL PETITION^{No.1O297 of 2O24}

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

ThisCriminalpetitionisfiledunderSection528oftheBharatiya Nagarik Suraksha^{Sanhita (for short tsNSS1to set aside the order dated} 23.04.2024^{passed in Crl.M.P.No'341of 2023 in Cr'No'215 of 2022 by} the learned I Additional^{Judicial Magistrateof First Class at Sircilla'}

¶24

2- The brief facts of^{the case are thatrespondent No'2 frledthe} petitionvideCrl.M.P.No.341of2023it.tCr.No.215of2022underSection 173(3) Cr.P.C. for^{takingcognizanceof the offence against the petitioner'} The trial Court on^{hearing respondent No.2, vide order dated 23'04'2024'} allowed the^{petitionon the groundthat the facts of the complaint and the} statement of witnesses^{are corroborating with each other. Aggrieved by} the same,^{petitioner filed the presentcriminal petition'}

¶25

3- Heard Sri Madas^{Bharath Chandra' learned counsel for the} petitioner and Sri D. Arun Kumar,^{learnedAdditional Public Prosecutor} for respondent No. 1- State.^{Pemsed the record.}

¶26

Learned counsel for the^{petitioner submitted that the docket} order shows that after^{hearing respondentNo.2, the petition was allowed.} He further submitted^{that the trial court withouthearing on the side of} the petitioner and^{withoutgiving any reasons, allowedthe petition which}

¶27

¶28

I t

¶29

is not in accordance with law. Hence, he prayed the Court to set aside the order of the trial Court dated 23.04.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.34l of 2023 in Cr.No.215 of 2022.

¶30

In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it appears that the trial Court without hearing on the side of the petitioner allowed the petition. Therefore, this Court deems it^t-rt to set aside the order of the trial Court dated 23.04.2024. Further, the trial Court is directed to decide the petition after hearing both sides by giving reasons.

¶31

Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed setting aside the order dated 23.O4.2Q24 passed in Crl.M.P.No.341 of 2Q23 in Cr.No.2l5 of 2022 on the file of the learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Sircilla.

¶32

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand

¶33

closed.

¶34

Sd/- N.^SRIHARI ASSISTANT^REGISTRAR

//TRUE^COPY//

SECTION^OFFICER

To,

'1 . The I Additional Judicial^{Magistrate of First Class at Sircilla'}

¶39

The Station^{House Officer' RajannaSircilla'P S' Yellareddypet'}

¶40

One^{CC tO SRI. MADAS BHARATH CHANDRAAdVOCAICTOPUC]}

¶41

Two CCs^{to the Additional PUBLIC PROSECUTOR' High Court for the State} of Telangana,^{at HYderabad [OUT]}

¶42

Two^{CD CoPies}

P\q, TL/gh

HIGH COURT

DATED:.O4lO9l2O24

.-::]]:::=<br>./i \til :<br>(f
.<br>12 ti0\j 202{
4,.
} i/
<br>,!jr;,1 p1 ,rl -) ,i.
-;?
iI

¶47

ORDER

¶48

CRLP.No.10297 of 2O24

¶49

ALLOWING THE CRIMINAL PETITION

¶50

@e*c, :-t \ to\r'tr

Korri Sai Sumant v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Korri Sai Sumant 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

Syed Shareef Vs The State of Telangana

Tapan Lal Jagadish Kumar Nayak Vs The State of Telangana

D. K. Kanniraj Vs The State of Telangana

Md. Shoaib Vs The State of Telangana

Jinka Raju Vs The State of Telangana

Gogula Ravinder Reddy Vs The State of Telangana