Lingala Vijayamma v. P.Venkat Reddy
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE : PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 265 OF 2019 Criminal Revision Case under Sections 397 & 401 of Cr'P.C. against the Order dated 22-01-2019 made in Crl. M.P. No.5B of 2019 in C.C. No.529 of 2017 on the file of the Court of the Special Magistrate, Errumanzil, and Hyderabad. BETWEEN:
Lingala Vijayamma, Wife of Manohar, Aged about 67 years, Occ. Retir-ed Goiernment Teacher, Resident of LIGH/1 , Q.No.47, B.K.Guda, Uday Nagar Colony, S.R.Nagar, Hyderabad, Telangana - 038.
Petitioner AND
1. P.Venkat Reddy, Son of Shambha Reddy, Plot No.24, Sai Harsha Nagar Colony, Hydershakote, Rajendra Nagar, Hyderabad, Telangana - 091 .
2. The State of Telangana, Represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court Buildings, Hyderabad.
... Respondent / Respondent / Accused lA NO: 1 F 2019 Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in c.c.No.529 of 2017 the Vll special Nlagistrate, Erramanzil, Hyderabad.
: Sri Mir Sameer Hussain Counsel for the Petitioner : None Appeared Counsel for the Respondent No.1 : Sri Vizarath Ali, Asst. Public Prosecutor Counsel for the Respondent No.2 The Court made the following: ORDER
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.265 oF 2019 ORDER:
The present Criminal Revision Case is filed aggrieved by the order dated 22.01.2019 passed in Crl.M.P.No.58 of 2Ol9 in C.C.No.529 of 2Ol7 on the file of the learned VII Special Magistrate, Erramanzil, Hyderabad (for short, "the trial Court"). 2.
No representation on behalf of the petitioner. Heard Mr. Vizarath Ali, Iearned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.2 State.
3.
A perusal of the record shows that there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner on 25.O9.2020, 25.11.2O2O and 06.11.2023. Even today also there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is inclined to dispose of the matter on merits.
4.
The brief facts of the case are that, the trial Court, vide order dated 22.O1 .2O19, in Crl.M.P.No.58 of 2Ol9 in C.C.No.529 of 2Ol7 dismissed the petition Iiled by the petitioner under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. seeking to re-open and re-call pWl for the purpose of further cross-examination of PW 1 stating that, the
w petition is not maintainable either under law or facts as the same is filed at a belated stage, without any cogent evidence. Aggrieved thereby, the present Revision 5.
Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that this Court vide order dated 27.O4.2O22 in Crl.R.C (SR) No.3198 of 2022 held that as against an interlocutory order, a Revision under Section 397 of Criminal Procedure Code is not maintainable. Therefore, seeks to dismiss the Revision. 6.
In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Criminal Revision Case at this stage, as the proceedings hereunder are covered by the order dated 27.O4.2O22 in Crl.R.C (SR) No.319B of 2022 passed by this Court, 7.
Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed. SD/. M. RAMANA KRISHNA DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// a/ SECTION OFFICER To,
1. The Vll Special tt/agistrate, Erramanzil, Hyderabad
2. One CC to Sri. Mir Sameer Hussain Advocate [OPUC]
3. Two CCs to The Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana touTl
4. Two CD Copies.
KMSw YIR
HIGH COURT EW, J DATED: 0511212023
ORDER
.i ;.'.,;
.
.,..
/ /i t:
:i'
oF 1' :
( -!
CRLRC.No.265 of 2019 riii .ii. t t/ ,J ' -' .- ,./ ' '.' l,-.
_ _:r "..l .\...- DISMISSING THE CRIMINAL RC +c{"eot W trn