Dismissed

Dr. Sura Shaillender v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC1 Jul 2024CRLP/6982/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an application to quash FIR proceedings or stay arrests. The Court directed the petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. and follow the guidelines in Arnesh Kumar.

What did the court decide?

Directing petitioners to appear before the Investigating Officer under Section 41-A Cr.P.C.; Criminal Petition disposed of.

Dr. Sura Shaillender Vs The State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2024)

¶1

[³³⁸⁵ ]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

MONDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6982 oF 2024

¶7

Between:

¶8

'1. Dr. Sura Shaillender,^-S/o. Sura Rajendra Prasad, Aged. 26 years, Occupation. PG l_st Year Student, R/o. Flat No. 104, lst Ftoo-r Laxmi Nilayani Apartment, 3rd Cross Road No. 1, Rock Town Colony, Manusoora6ad, Hyderabad. (A -1)

¶9

G. Srinivas, S/o. Venkata Rathnakar, Aged. 43 years, Occupation. patiot Relation Officer, Prathima Hospital, R/o. H. No. 3-87, Ramadugu, Karimnagar. (A-2)

¶10

A. Sanjula alias Sanjura, S/o. Venkata Laxman Kumar, Aged. 24 years, 9ccup.ation..^{House-s_urgeon, R/o- H. No. 102, LotusBtoct<, GMR Town-Ship,} Mamidipalli Village, Karimnagar. (A - 3)

¶11

...Petitioner/Accused No.1 to 3

¶12

AND

¶13

1 The State of Telangana, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad Through, P.S. Karimnagar Riural, Karimnagar district.

¶14

2 Perapalli Thirupthi, S/o. Lasmaiah Aged. 34, Occupation_ Household, R/o. H.No. 1-42-4, Vilochavaram Village, Manthani Mandal, Peddapalli Diskict.

¶15

...Respondents/Complainant

¶16

Petition under Section 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 FIR in Crime No.329 of 2024 on the file of PS Karimnagar Rural, Karimnagar district.

¶17

l.A. NO: 1OF 2024

¶18

Petition under Section 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 stay all further proceedings in Crime No.329 of 2O24 of pS Karimnagar Rural, Karimnagar district, including arrest of the petitioners, pending disposal of the criminal petition.

¶19

This Petition coming on for^{hearing'upon perusing tf e Menlorandumof} Grounds of Criminal^{Petitionand upon hearingthe argum€ nts of Sri M Ram} Mohan Reddy, Advocate^{for the Petitioner and the Public Prosecutoron behalfof} the Respondent No.1^{andnone appeared for the Respondent f\lo 2'}

¶20

The Court made^{the following:ORDER}

¶21

(

¶22

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA

¶23

CRIMINAL PETITION No.6982 of 2024

¶24

ORDER

¶25

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.) by the petitioners/ accused Nos.1' to 3 seeking to quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.329 of 2024 on the file of Karimnagar Rural Station, Karimnagar, registered for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 304-A, 290, 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 (1)(r)(s),3(2)(va) of the SC/ST(POA)Act

¶26

2 Heard Sri M. Ram Mohan Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri S.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for respondent No. 1 - State.

¶27

J Without going into the merits of the case, since the punishment prescribed for the offences alleged against the petitioners is less than seven (07) years, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the petitioners to appea-r before the Investigating Ofhcer on or before IO.O7 .2024 between 1 1:OO a.m. and O5:OO p.m. and in turn, the Investigating Officer is directed to follow the procedure laid down under Section 4 1-A Cr. P. C and also the guidelines lormulated by the Hon'ble Supreme

¶28

¶29

Court of India in Arnesh^{Kumar u.Statte o.fBiharl} scrupulousl-r-. Ho$Iever,^{the petitioners shall subnritthe ir defense} ald co-operate u'ith the Investigating^{Ollicer as ernd r'r'hen} required bv furnishing information^{and produ.ce allrelevant} documcnts/ material required^{for the purposeof the investigation} and the Investigating^{Officershall considerthe szrmebr:fore filing} appropriate report^{before the learned Magistratet:oncerned'}

¶30

4 Accordingly, the Criminal^{Petitionis disprlsed of}

¶31

Miscellaneous applications, if^{any penJing, sha1l also}

¶32

stald closed

¶33

//TRUE^COPY//

¶34

Sd/. K. AMMAJI ASSTSTANT^REGIS)RAR v"

¶35

SECTION^OFFICER

¶36

To,

¶37

The Additional^{Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Karinrnagar}

¶38

i. ih;'strii;"^{uouse officei"Ka'i'n"g"Rural PoliceSta'tion'Karimnargar} 3. Two^{CCsto the Public pt"t""'t"t' High Court for the State of Telanganaat} HYderabad [OUT]

¶39

4 C;;; CC^{to Sri M iRam Mohan Reddy' Advocate[oPUc]}

¶40

Two CD^CoPies

¶41

ADt(kam \r

¶42

' lzotql^{e scc zt I}

¶43

HIGH^COURT DATED:01^lO7l2O24

¶44

ORDER

¶45

--11:'*
i Tri
ilce:
( o
a-
cJ .,!
L) 1 I 't J u'-llt il
! 202[ ;

¶46

CRLP.No.6982^{of 2024}

¶47

DISPOSING^{OF THE CRLP}

¶48

€ C""eA
Y^.
j + PY

Dr. Sura Shaillender v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Sura Shaillender 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Zeeshan Mohammed Vs The State of Telangana

Burri Lingaiah Vs The State of Telangana

Fms Dental Hospitals Private Limited Vs the State of Telangana

Pitta Anil Kumar Vs The State of Telangana

Nayab Ahmed Ansari Vs The State of Telengana

Moutam Dhana Lakshmi Vs The State of Telengana