IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH WEDNESDAY THE SECOND DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2092 OF 2012 AND CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2097 OF 2012 Between: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2092 OF 2012.
Rachakonda Tulasi … Petitioner/A-1 V/s.
The State of Andhra Pradesh Represented by Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad & Anr. … Respondents/Complainant Between: CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2097 OF 2012.
Rachakonda Uma Maheswara Rao & 3-Ors. … Petitioners/A2 to A5 V/s.
The State of Andhra Pradesh Represented by Public Prosecutor High Court of Andhra Pradesh Hyderabad & Anr. … Respondents/Complainant Counsel for Petitioners … Sri Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao Counsel for Respondents … Public Prosecutor for R-1 Sri C.Praveen Kumar for R-2 The court made the following : [order follows] HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2092 OF 2012 AND CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2097 OF 2012 COMMON ORDER :
These criminal petitions are filed to quash CC.No. 13 of 2012 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Srikakulam for taking cognizance for offence under section 211 IPC.
2. Heard both sides.
3. As seen from the material papers filed alongwith these criminal petitions, complainant filed a private complaint before Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Srikakulam and the court below after recording sworn statement posted the matter for consideration to 29/12/2011, thereafter it is not known what order is passed by the learned Magistrate , because the petitioner has not produced the said order.
4. When these matters have come up for hearing earlier, the same point was raised and the advocate for petitioners took time for producing certified copy of the order on the basis of which cognizance was taken by the court below to examine its correctness. But today without producing wszthe said order, advocate for petitioners produced summons received by them in the said CC. These criminal petitions are not filed to quash the summons. On the other hand, they are filed to quash the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate in CC.No.13 of 2012. Without filing the impugned order which is challenged, these petitions cannot be entertained, as such, petitions are dismissed at admission stage. Petitioners are at liberty to avail remedies available under law challenging the cognizance order.
5. Accordingly, both the criminal petitions are dismissed.
JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR .
02/07/2014 I s L HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NOs. 2092 & 2097 OF 2012 Circulation No.60 Date: 02/07/2014 Court Master : I s L Computer No. 20th Court Hall