Dismissed

Ishoo Narang and 3 Others v. The State of Telangana and Another

Telangana HC3 Sept 2024CRLP/5925/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C sought to quash FIR No.432 of 2019. The Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that investigation was completed and a charge-sheet was filed, rendering the petition infructuous. The petition was dismissed accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of complaint and investigation in FIR No. 432 of 2019 dismissed as infructuous.

Ishoo Narang and 3 Others Vs The State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR.THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD}

¶2

TUESDAY,THE THIRD DAY OF^SEPTEIMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 5925 OF 2020

¶6

Between:

¶7

'l . lshoo Narang S/o V.S.Narang

¶8

Chandulal Patel S/o Harjivan Patel

¶9

Rudra Raju Srinivas Shah S/o R.V.Raiu

¶10

lt//s. Kyori Oremin Limited Hyderabad^{rep.by its I\4anagingDirector, lshooNrang} s/o v s Narang

¶11

..petitioners/Accused Nos.¹ to 4

¶12

AND

¶13

The State of Telangana rep.^by its lnspector^{of Police, GlchibowliPolice Station,} Gachibowli, CyberJbad Pdlice-Commissionerate,^{Ranga Reddy District (through} Public Prosecutor, Hiqh Court^of the State^{of Telangana,at Hyderabad)}

¶14

lV/s. lClCl Bank Limited rep. by^its Authorised^{Signatory,lClCl Bank Towners,} STMEAG Department, 4'' floor, Plot :No.^{12, Financial District, Nanakramguda,} Gachibowli, Hyderabad ... Respondents/Complainants

¶15

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^{prayingthat in the circumstancesstated} in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal^{Petition,the High Court may be pleased} to quash the complaint and rnvestionⁱⁿ FIR^{No. 432 of 2O19 dated 02.08.2019 on the} file of the lnspector of Police Gachibowli^{Police Station, Cyberabad Police} Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District^{in so far as the petitioners are concerned.}

¶16

lA No.1 of 208

¶17

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that^{rn the circumstancesstated} in lhe [/emorandum of Grounds of Criminal^{Petition,the High Court may be pleased} to stay of all further proceedings including^{arrest of the petitionersin connectionwith} concerning FIR No. 432 ol 2019, dated^{02.08.2019 on the file of the lnspectorof} Police, Gachibowli, cyberabad Police commissionerate^{Ranga Reddy District on the} complaint of the 2''d respondenl,^pending disposal^{of the quashpetition.}

¶18

This Petition coming on for hearing,^{uponperusing the Memorandumof} Grounds of criminal Petition and upon^{hearing the argumentsof lvlr. D.B.chaitanya,} Advocate for the Petitioner and Ms.^{S.Madhavi, Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf} of the Respondent No.1 and none appeared^{for the RespondentNo.2.}

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER:

¶20

¶21

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL

¶22

CRIMINAL PETITION No.5925 of 2O2O

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

The present Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C seeking to quash the complaint and investigation in FIR.No.432 of 2019, dated 02.08.2019, on the file of the Inspector of Police, Gachibowli Police Station, Cvberabad Police Commissionerate, Ranga Reddy District.

¶25

None appears for the petitioners.

¶26

Heard Ms. S.Madhavi, learned Assistant Prrblic Prosecutor appearing for respondent No. 1 -State. t

¶27

Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that the investigation is completed and the police have filed charge-sheet in Crime No.432 of 2Ol9 on the file of X Metropolitan Magistrate, Kukatpally. Therefore, nothing survives for adjudication and hence seeks to dismiss the present Criminal Petition as infructuous.

¶28

Recording the submissions made by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, this Criminal Petition is dismissed as infructuous.

¶29

¶30

	Miscellaneouspetitions,ifany,pendingin^thiscriminal
p	etition,sha-llstandclosed.
	Sd/-MOHD. ISMAIL ASSISTANT GIS R //TRUECOPY' SEC ION OFFICER
To,
1. 2. 3. 4.	TheXllAdditional^{Metropolitan Magistrate, Kukatpally at Prashantinagar,} Cyberabad The Station House^{Officer, Gachibowli Police Station,Cyberabad} One CC to^Mr.D.B.Chaitanya,^{Advocate (OPuC)} TwoCCtoPUBLICPROSECUToR(TG)AdvocateHighCourtforthestateof Telangana [OUT]
5.	Two CDCoPies
w

HIGH COURT

DATED: 03.09.2024

ORDER

o t. I HC S l,i
(
f i
o
0 I JAil 2025
;
('
*
sPATCHED

¶35

CRLP.No. 5925 of 2020

¶36

DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL PETITION AS INFRUCTUOUS

¶37

g^."6d ffi"

Ishoo Narang and 3 Others v. The State of Telangana and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ishoo Narang and 3 Others v. The State of Telangana and Another

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

Pulijala Srinivas Vs The State of Telangana

Yarram Rajeswar Rao , Raju Vs The State of Telangana

Smt.Gayathri Devulapalli Vs State of Telangana And Another

Gopalakishan Agarwal, Hyd Vs Md. Aslam, Secbad and 2 Othrs

Mumai Ramesh, Vs Sri N. Sudershan Rao and 4 Ors.

Ghulam Mohammed Khan Vs The State of Telangana