Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Telangana
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Palanki Nageswara Reddy And 5 Others vs State Of A P

High Court Of Telangana|10 July, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR Crl.P.M.P.No.10998 of 2014 in/and Criminal Petition No.7468 of 2014 Date: 26-9-2014 Between Palanki Nageswara Reddy and 5 others … Petitioners/ Accused 2 to 7 and State of A.P., Rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad … Respondent Thummalapalli Krishna Rao … Respondent/
De facto Complainant
HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR Crl.P.M.P.No.10998 of 2014 in/and Criminal Petition No.7468 of 2014 Order:
Crl.P.M.P.No.10998 of 2014:
The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that order in some other case apparently was typed in this case. Order dictated was directing the Trial Court to proceed with the trial and to dispense with the presence of the petitioners before the Trial Court. The order is a totally different order. Therefore, the same deserves to be rectified.
2. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Instead of the order as shown, the following order is passed in Crl.P.No.7468 of 2014.
Crl.P.No.7468 of 2014:
3. This petition was filed by accused 2 to 7 in C.C.No.718 of 2010 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mylavaram, Krishna District seeking for the quashment of the same.
4. The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant. His complaint was registered as FIR in Crime No.33 of 2007 by Reddigudem Police Station, Krishna District. Subsequently, charge-sheet was filed alleging that the petitioners herein, who are accused 2 to 7 along with accused No.1 committed the offence under Section 420 IPC.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are not guilty of the offences levelled against them and that the case deserves to be quashed so far as the petitioners are concerned.
6. I therefore consider that it would be appropriate for the Trial Court to proceed with C.C.No.718 of 2010 and dispose of the same on merits. During the pendency of C.C.No.718 of 2010, the presence of the petitioners before the Trial Court deserves to be dispensed with.
7. Accordingly, this criminal petition is disposed of. The learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mylavaram, Krishna District is requested to proceed with C.C.No.718 of 2010. During the pendency of C.C.No.718 of 2010, the petitioners, who are accused 2 to 7, need not appear before the Trial Court. Their presence before the Trial Court thus is dispensed with. However, if the Trial Court considers it necessary for the petitioners herein to be present before the Court on any date of the hearing, the Court may issue such a direction for the presence of the petitioners before the Trial Court. The miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this petition shall stand closed.
Dr. K.G.SHANKAR, J.
26th September, 2014. Ak HON’BLE Dr. JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR Crl.P.M.P.No.10998 of 2014 in/and Criminal Petition No.7468 of 2014 26th September, 2014. (Ak)
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Palanki Nageswara Reddy And 5 Others vs State Of A P

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
10 July, 2014
Judges
  • K G Shankar Crl