Janumpally Sudharshan v. The State Of Telangana

i [ 32se ]

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO:547 OF 2023 Criminal Revision filed under Section 397 & 401 of Cr.p.C., aggrieved by the judgment dated 20-07-2023 passed in Crl. MP No. 342/2023 in C.C. No. 61812022, on the file of the court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Atmakur. Between:

Janumpally Sudharshan, S/o. Late Pedda Buchaiah, aged about 52 years, Occ.- Business, R/o. Kothakota village and Mandal, Wanaparthy Diskict. - ,-'--

...Petitioner/Accused

AND The State of Telangana, rep. by its Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad representing PS, Kothakota of Wanaparthy District.

The District Civil Supply Officer, Wanaparthy District, Wanaparthy. ,..RESPONDENTS lA NO: 1 OF 2023 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 of all further proceedings in C.C. No. 61812022 on the file of the JFCM, Atmakur including appearance of the petitioner Counsel for the Petitioner : Mr. M. Damodar Reddy Counsel for the Respondents : Ms. S. Madhavi Assistant Public Prosecutor The Court made the following: ORDER 1-,F

-7 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.547 of 2023 ORDDR This Criminal Revision Case is filed aggrieved by the order dated 20.O7.2023 in Crl.M.P.No.342 of 2O23 in C.C.No.6l8 of 2022 on the file of I t the learned Juclicial First Class Magistrate, Atmakur in dismissing the I discharge petition filed by the petitioner (for short, "the trial Court"). 2.

Heard Mr. M. Damodar Reddy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the revision petitioner and Ms. S. Madhavi, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State.

3.

After arguing for some time, when this Court has expressed its opinion stating that the said contentions are disputed questions of fact which need to be gone into by the learned trial Court, learned counsel for the petitioner restricted his prayer to the extent of dispensing with the presence of the petitioner before the learned trial Court. 4.

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, the attendance of the petitioner-Accused is dispensed with in C.C.No.618 of 2022 pending on the file of the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Atmakur, when represented by his counsel on record. The attendance of the petitioner-accused dispensed with subject to filing an affidavit by the petitioner stating that in his absence, the proceedings conducted by his counsel will not be disputed by him in any manner and shall not dispute his identity also. However, the petitioner-accused shall appear before the learned Magistrate as and when his presence is required. [n the event of

failure of the petitioner to appear when the Court directs, this order dispensing with his attendance shall stand cancelled. 5.

Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Criminal Revision Case shall also stand closed.

Sd/- M. RAMANA KRISHNA DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// \ S ON OFFICER To, The Judicial First Class Magistrate' Atmakur. TwoCCstoPublicProsecutor,HighCourtfortheStateofTelanganaat Hyderabad. (OUT) one CC to Mr lvl. Damodar Reddy Advocate [OPUC] Two CD Copies 3.

4.

DL/gh

\ HIGH COURT DATED:05/09i2024 IF S q (

ORDER

) ) CRLRC.No.547 oI 2023 2[25 10lrJ I l( DEs PA-( CRIMINAL REVISION CASE IS DISPOSED OF ry