Dismissed

Mohd Osman Qureshi v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC19 Sept 2024CRLP/11073/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge bench disposed of a criminal petition filed under Sections 482 and 52G Cr.P.C./BNSS. By agreement of counsel limiting the prayer to speedy disposal, the court directed the trial court to conclude the original case within six months and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Direct the trial court to dispose of the underlying case within six months. Dismiss the criminal petition.

Mohd Osman Qureshi Vs The State of Telangana — Telangana HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

rE M B E R rH u RS DA Y' Iffi ,)lli,f'^=ilJiffi'(,i: Fff

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶5

cRlMINAL PE TITION No:1 1073 0F2024

¶6

Between:

¶7

Mohd Osman eureshi iri;,,::i:,,xyi::!,*?i:'ll,.i1Hi1,?i.fi^{:,x,,i.ff[!,1.:"3n533,.T,,i?}

¶8

Rafeeq Kareem euresh

¶9

Busine'ss,R/;.HN;:;6;PE?t?rtfj',#i,.l6:;:fr .tr,.T.1T:HX"y;3^,o* S/o.Sata

¶10

Shabbir Shaik, S/o.Sata raluq, south sotapur, dtf,?r"3'$:3it^{31 Years,} occ. Driver, R/o.Aherwadi

¶11

...^{petitioner/Accused} No.1 to 3

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Telanoana yiffi:AgJ*;':iil'f'?.ii ff8,,.oJ,,.i",13?',ii'fl,.":',,??i:?3'.311"3P',i',&i; ... Respondents/De-facto Respondents/De-facto Complainant Petition under Section 52g of B'N.S.s. praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be preased to ca, for the records in c.c. No. 142 0f 201'on the fire of the court of the Judiciar First crass Magistrate at parigi and quash the same against the Petitioners /Accused Nos. 1 to 3.

¶14

... Respondents/De-facto Respondents/De-facto Complainant

¶15

l.A. NO: 10F 2024

¶16

Petition under Section 4g2 of Cr.p.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition, the High court may be pleased to grant stay of a, further proceedings incruding appearance of the Petitioners/Accused Nos.1 to 3 in c-c. No. 1 42 0f 2018 0n the fire of the court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate at parigi.

¶17

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearrng the arguments of Sri R Gopi Mohan, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Addl. F,ublic Prosecutor (TG) on behalf of the Respondent state.

¶18

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶19

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITIoN No.ll O73 ot 20.24

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

This priminal petition is I-rled by the petitioners against the proceedings in c.c.No. r42 of 2ora pending on the rrle of the Judicial First Class Magistrate at parigi, Vikarabad District.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioners conhned his prayer only to the extent of speedy disposal of the C.C.

¶23

Hence, considering the limited grievance of the petitioners and considering the fact that the original C.C. pertains to the year 2018, the trial court is directed to dispose of the c.c. as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six (O6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶24

Accordingly, the Criminal petition is disposed of. pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Criminal petition shall also stand closed. i

¶25

¶26

sd/- K. AJI ASSISTANT REGI RAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

'1 . The Judicial First Class lr/agistrate at Parigi

¶31

The Station House Officer, Chengomul Police Station, Vikarabad District.

¶32

One CC to Sri. R Gopi Mohan Advocate [OPUC].

¶33

Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana. [OUT]

¶34

Two CD Copies.

YIR /sh

HIGH COURT

DATED:1910912024

':.
t/^-
.-, ' .'. ,.r\r,
.4, ,r \',r|
l', ' o ?ffi I,i
a/j
.: /,-t" // -'/
, ,-r 4, y'
'u ""-Z
t-

¶39

ORDER

¶40

CRLP.No "11073 ot 2024

¶41

DISPOSING OF THE CRL.P.

¶42

2\ r"1

Mohd Osman Qureshi v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Osman Qureshi 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

Management of South Glass Company Vs The State of Telangana

Kishore Singh Vs The State of Telangana

Thota Venu Vs The State of Telangana

Eranolla Lokeshwara Vs Sat Yalamanchili

Jolapally Praveen Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Prathibha Undinti Vs The State of Telangana