Partly allowed

Md. Haneef v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC8 Feb 2024CRLP/1513/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the Criminal Petition filed under Section 482 CrPC to quash/suspend proceedings. The court declined to suspend the sentence but, considering the petitioner's financial hardship, reduced the compensation from Rs. 2,00,000 to Rs. 1,00,000 and directed deposit within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Criminal petition allowed in part; compensation reduced to Rs. 1,00,000; petitioner directed to pay the reduced amount within three weeks.

Md. Haneef Vs The State of Telangana — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁸⁵ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

THURSDAY,THE EGHTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSANO AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITIoN NO:1513OF 2024 Between: Md.Haneef, S/oAbdulRasheed, aged about42Warc,Occ. Business RloH.No 3-14313C,Subashnagar,KalrivakurthyTownandMandal, Nagarkurnool District. ...PETITK)NER/ACCUSED AND
1.TheStateofTelangana, rep.byPublicProsecutor,HighCourtforthestateof TelanganaatHyderabad 2.M.Lakshmi Bai,WoT.Darmender Singh Aged about 43^years,Occ. Teacher,Rl/o Ramachandra Residency,Kalwalcu(hyTown and^{Mandal, Mahabubnagar}Dstrict. ...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANTS Petition underSection482ofCr.P.C prayingthatintheckcumstances statedinthe Memorandum of GroundsofCriminal Petition, the High Court may be pleasedtoQuash theOrderdated291912023inCrl.M.P.No.578 of 2023 inCrl. .^{n.No.tgof2023onthe fileoftheCourtofthePrincipalDistrictandSessionslr} Judge at Nagarkurnool. 1.4-NO:2OF2024
Petition under Section 482ofCr.P.C prayingthatinthecircumstances statedintheMemorandumofGroundsof Criminal Petition,theHighCourtmay be pleased to stay ofallfurther proceedings pursuant to Order datedNl9l2O23inCr
ThisPetition comingonforhearing, uponperusingtheMemorandumof GrouMs ofCriminal Petitionandupon hearingtheargumentsof SriMohd funjad AliAnsari,Adrrocatefof thePetitionerandofSriS. Ganesh,Learned Assistant Public Prosecutoronbehalfofth€ Respondent No.1 andoftheRespondenttlo.2 isnotappeariflginperson orby Advocate. TheCourtmdethefollowing:ORDER

ffi

'::^-'i-t ffi

,'I

.1,. F'

I I

THE^{HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K' SUJANA} CRIMI^{NAL PETITIONNo.1513 of 2024}

¶14

ORDER:

¶15

This Criminal^{Petitionis filed underSection 482 of the Code} of Criminal^{Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr'P'C'') by the petitioner'} who is arrayed^{as accused,to quash the proceedingsagainst him} in Crl.M.P.No^{578 of2023 inCrl'A'No'18of2023 dated} 2g.0g.2o23,^{pending on the lile of the learned Principal District} and Sessions^{Judge, Nagarkurnool' whereinthe order of the tria]} Court it^{is heldas follows:}

¶16

ciralmslances "Hauing^{taken into of consid'eration} the . case'^{att the facts and} the i"iition.r/^{opp"llant/accusedisdirected} .^topaa "il) oo'oi6i tt' suspe'ston^{ol the execution of the} sentence^and' fine^{in ine impugned- iudgment since it} "ontoint^{a difaultlaut witit simple imprisonmentof} three montLs-^{incase of nonpagme-ntof the Jine} omount.^{Thesaid o^ouit sniU ie depositedto the} o1 CC No'397^{oJ 2O17 on or before1,0' 1O'2O23} AIso "r.ai, issue^{noticeto ;he respondent/complatnant and} ca on^{10.10 2023 '}

¶17

Heard Sri^{Mohd' Amjad Ali Ansari' learnedcounsel for the} petitioner as^{weII as Sri S' Ganesh' learned AssistantPublic} Prosecutor^{for respondent No'1 - State'}

¶18

Learned^{counsel for thepetitioner contendedthat} petitioner/ accused^{has incurredhuge loss in his business and he} is unabie to^{pay the said amount due to his hnancial conditions'}

-l

sl(s Crl.P.No.1573 oJ 2024

¶23

AS such, it is very difficult to him to pay an amount of Rs.2,OO,OOO/-. Therefore, prayed the Court to suspend the execution of sentence.

¶24

¶25

In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is not inclined to suspend the execution of sentence but due to financial conditions of the petitioner, this Court deems it fit and appropriate to reduce the compensation amount from Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) to Rs. 1,OO,OO0/_ (Rupees one lakh only). Further, the petitioner is directed to deposit the said amount, as directed by the trial Court, within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶26

With the above direction, this Criminal petition is a_llowed in part.

¶27

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand

¶28

closed.

¶29

To,

¶30

Sd/. V. HARI PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER

¶31

The Principal District and Sessions Judge at Nagarkurnool

¶32

The Station House Officer, Kalwaku(hy police Station, Nagarkumool

¶33

One CC to Sri Motld Amjad Ali Ansari, Advocate [OpUC]

^toia-

Two CCs to pubtic prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana (OUT)

¶38

Two CD Copies

ffi

BJLB/kam

ffi

it:

4i], ,r&

HIGH COURT DATED:OB|02|2O24

ffi

t
I

ORDER

CRLP.No.151 3 of 2024

¶52

CRIMINAL PETITION IS ALLOWED
&
ffi

¶53

#
€1.i<br>1HE S14
oR 14.
k
(d(
oJ
11 nia pny4
a:

o6spATC
ffi

¶54

ffi
4

¶55

ffi'
_l

Md. Haneef v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Haneef 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

Anirudh Prasad Kankani Vs The State of Telangana

Byreddy Sandeep Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Manj u Kaul Vs The State of Telangana

Mekala Raghuma Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Koya Praveen Kumar Reddy Vs the State of Telangana

Annaboina Thirupathi Yadav @ at Yadav Vs The State of Telangana