Dismissed

J.S.R. Durga Prasad v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC5 Sept 2024CRLP/1465/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Telangana dismissed three criminal petitions filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash criminal proceedings. The court held that since the trial court matters were withdrawn, the petitions became infructuous and were accordingly dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The criminal petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C were dismissed as infructuous because the trial court matters were withdrawn. Miscellaneous petitions were closed.

J.S.R. Durga Prasad Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

[^32ss I

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR AT HYbTJREABIfE

¶4

OF TELANGANA

¶5

THUR.S..DAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FO_UR--''

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HON'BLE SRt JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

¶8

CRIMINAL PETI TION Nos:1460 1465 a nd 1474 ot 2020

¶9

Crimina IPetition No.1460 of 2020

¶10

Between:

¶11

J.S.R. Durga Prasad, - S/o. J.S. t Accoun ta n t: R/o FirA 2 sI' "e 032. HE i HE 33; &: ",fl , A fl :y: fl,rd;,rff :,, Bj, 1";SB

¶12

AND

¶13

...Petitioner/A4

¶14

The State of Telangana, Through its p.p. High Court, at Hyderabad.

¶15

Krishna Kidambi. S/o. K 'H:giij.iTt")i?5;?:?1,J,X,..ft

¶16

ip.:l&1fr *Si,,?,ii:l?f; 3ilTl?;,:,",

¶17

"t?A#,,T.,,1*iTiffi M/s. Navanidhi Electron *x:,,#;X?:,,:ru:":.S,Xf^{[""?,liliJil:,,,lr,n}

¶18

Sri A. Ramanatha Sastry, S/o. Late Sri A. Satyanarayana, Aged about 70 vears, occ: Business rft,". yg.lqd,Is 6;;.j;I;i firr. Nava n idh i E tectron ics H' N o' 2'-2 - 1 1 4 4rz simi, r'i Li" i;ir k #; H yd e ra b a d -50 0 044.

¶19

i$; [1i"1?;,

¶20

Sunitha Challa, D/o. Sri I e.,e,.1e!eturiiib,",Ji#40qffi#iili,:Ef^{yd,fll:sF?lt,i:),fi} ,T:|,on"&_,. 1 1 44t2slN1, New NaIkunta, Hyo..iora_s-odoa"ii'iLhngana state.

¶21

... Respondents/Respondents

¶22

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.p.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Ground. "i cri#i"ii petition, the High court may be pleased to quash the oroceedings in cc Addl chief Metroporitan rr,ragist.atl,"at Hv;;;;, '".ogo ;gainst^{"r 2019 on the} the petitioner/Accused^{file of the lV}

l.A. NO:2 OF 2020

Petition under Section 482 o'f Cr.P .C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in CC No.690 of 20'19, on the file of Hon'ble lV Addl. Chief tvletropolitan Magistrate, At Hyderabad including the appearance of the Ar;cused till the disposal of the tvlain Quash Petition in the interest of the^justice.

¶27

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the l/lemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Amancharla V Gopala Rao, Advo,:ate for the Petitioner and the Ms- S. Madhavi, Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.'1 and None Appeared for the Respondents No.2 to 5.

¶28

Criminal Petition No.1465 of 2020

¶29

Between:

¶30

J.S.R. Durga Prasad, S/o. J-S. Sarma, aged about 57 yrs, Occ: Chartered Accountant, R/o. HIG 25, BHEL HIG Colony, Madhava Nagar, Hyderabad - 500 o32.

¶31

...Petitioner/A4

¶32

AND

¶33

The State of Telangana, Through its P.P, High Court, at Hyderabad,

¶34

Krishna Kidambi, S/o. K.S.Raghavan, Aged Major, Occ. Business, R/o. Flat No. 501, Plot Nc 246-255, Fortune Residency, Kavoori Hills, Madhapur, Hyderabad.

¶35

M/s. Navanidhi E:lectronics Pvt Ltd., Having its Regd. Office at Plot No. 21, IDA Mallapur, Nacharam, Hyderabad-Telangana State. Rep. by its Managing Director, Sri A. Flamanatha Sastry-

¶36

Sri A. Ramanatha Sastry, S/o. Late Sri A. Satyanarayana, Aged about 70 years, Occ: Business (The Managing Director of M/s. Navanidhi Electronics Pvt. Ltd.,) Rl/o. H.No.2-2-1 1441251N1, New Nallkunta, Hyderabad-500044. Telangana State.

¶37

Sunitha Challa, D/o. Sri A. Ramanatha Sastry, Aged about 38 years, Occ: Business (The Director of M/s. Navanidhi Electonics Pvt. Ltd,,) R/o. H.No.2-211441251N1 , New Nallkunta, Hyderabad-500044. Telangana State.

¶38

...Respondents/Respondents

¶39

Petition under isection 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in CC No.692 of 2019 on the file of the lV Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Hyderabad, against the Petitioner/Accused N o.4.

'.,rcZ

I.A. NO: 2 OF 2020

Petition under section 4g2 of cr. p.c praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminil petition, ftre nigt-corrt mav 9:^plg3.""q 10^{glant sray of} -ail,furrher^{proceedings in CC} No.692 oiZOrglo"inu file of Hon'bte rv Addr. chief Metropoliian Magisirate, At Hyderabal ,"iroirg ir," appearance of the Accused tifi the disposar of the N4ain euash petition i,i tn" interest of the justice.

¶44

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar petition and upon hearing the arguments of sri Amancharra V Gopala Rao, Advocate for the petitioner and the Ms. s. tVladhavi, Assistant Public Prosecutor on beharf of the Respondent No.1 and None Appeared for the Respondents No.2 to 5.

¶45

Criminal Petition No. 1474 of 2O20

¶46

Between:

¶47

J S.R Durga Prasad, S/o. J.S. Sarma, aged about 5/ yrs, Occ: Chartered Accountant, R/o. HtG 25, BHEL Htc Corbny] naalnaia Nagbr, Hvi"r.OiJ _t6o

¶48

...Petitioner/A4

¶49

AND

¶50

The State of Telangana, Through its p p. High Court, at Hyderabad.

¶51

Krishna {!ambi, S/o KS.Raghavan, Aged Major, Occ. Business, Rio. Flat No. 501,^ptot No. 246_2ss, Foiune iesiolnCvlxiro;;rrr",'rr,'iihl'pri '- Hyderabad.

¶52

3' M/s. Navanidhi Erectronics .pyt Ltg , Having its Regd. office at prot No. 21. t DA Ma ilap u r, Nacha ra m, Hydera bad-Te tr"n ginr-Strte. iii"p^-;y iG il;;r;ir g Director, Sri A. Ramanatha Sastry.

¶53

Sri A. Ramanatha Sas.$r, S-19 Late Sri A. Satyanarayana, Aged about 70 years, occ: Business_(The Managing Director'of n,llil ruarlaniorri Ei"I"iion-". Pvt- Ltd-,) R/o. H No 2-2-1 144t2siNi, New Nailkunta, nyaeraoau-soooaa.Telangana State,

¶54

sunitha charra, D/o. sri A- Ramanatha Sastry, Aqed about 3g vears. occ: 9t:ilg::-qne^{Director of M/s. Navanidrri eie'iton-iii} Fu. Lti]1,iil h],,iiz-z_ 1144125tN1, New Nailkunta, Hyderabad_SOO0aa. Tetanlani 6Ai;,^{' ' "" -}

¶55

.Respondents/Respondents

¶56

Petition under Secl s ta ted i n t n e M e m o ra n d u#:, :1'" fi ;B ""^{:i 3.. ;i: I i} "fli^{il'"I i#'ffi ;'.q ;g;;} be pleased to quash the proceedings in cc No.691 of 2019 on th;file of the tv

¶57

Addl. Chief Metropolitan [Vlagistrate, at Hyderabad, against the Petitioner/Accused No.4.

¶58

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2020

¶59

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P .C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorardum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in CC. No. 691 of 2019, on the file of Hon'ble lV Addl Chief lvlekopolitan Magistrate, At Hyderabad including the appearance of the Acc;used till the disposal of the Main Quash Petition.

¶60

This Petition comrng on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal F'etition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Amancharla V Gopala Rao, Advocate for the Petitioner and the Ms. S. il/ladhavi, Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and None Appeared for the Respondents No.2 to {r.

¶61

The Court made the lollowing: COMMON ORDER

¶62

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V,\IENUGOPAL CRIMTNAL PETITION Nos.1460 1465 and 1474 OF 2O2O

¶63

COMMON ORDER:

¶64

' These Criminal Petitions are frled under Sectio n 4g2 of Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.Nos.69O, 69 I and 692 of 2Ol9 on the hle of the learned IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad.

¶65

¶66

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner(s) and Ms.S.Madhavi, learned Assistalt Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No. 1-State.

¶67

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner(s) submitted that the matters before the trial Court were withdrawn. Therefore, the cause in these Criminal Petitions does not survive for adjudication. Hence, seeks to dismiss the petitions as infructuous

¶68

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No. 1-State takes no objection to the same.

¶69

¶70

Recording the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner(s), these Criminal Petitions are dismissed as infructuous

¶71

MiscellarLeous petitions, if aly, pending in these criminal

¶72

petitions, sha-ll stand closed.

¶73

sd/- A. sREENly ASA REDDY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ,

//TRUE COPY//

SETTION OFFICER

To,

'1. The lV Additic,nal Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, at Hyderabad'

¶78

The Station House^{Officer, CCS, DD, Police Station, Hyderabad District'}

¶79

Two ccs to the^{Public Prosecutor, High court for the stateof Telangana at} Hyderabad [OUT]

¶80

a. One CC to Mis. Amancharla^{V GopalaRao,Advocate} [OPUC]

¶81

Two CD Copies

Kam/DL

I t

HIGH COURT

DATED:0510912024

COMMON ORDER

:=
,t" e>r11lt o
1
7
1 'B J[h ?$6 o
oo) I
I
I
,)ESPN,1 C,<br>

¶88

CRLP.Nos.1460,1465 and 1474 of 2020

¶89

THESE CRIMINAL PETITIONS ARE DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS

¶90

o\v

J.S.R. Durga Prasad v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J.S.R. Durga Prasad 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

Smt. Potukuchi Pushya Vs The State of the Telangana

Parle Agro Vs Prl.Secy., Home Dept. Hyd., and Another

Mokalla Ravi and 4 Others Vs The State of Telangana and Another

Dasari Sudhakar Vs Dasari Prasanna Kumari

J.S.R. Durga Prasad Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

The Deputy Commissioner Vs State of Telangana