Smt. Rameswari Devi v. The State Of Telangana

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THURSDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF MARCH, TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE SHAMEEM AKTHER CRLPMP.NO:6207 of 2017 IN CRLP NO:6092 of 2017 Between:

1 Bayya Hanumantha Rao, S/o Narasimhulu, 2 Bayya Venugopal, S/o B. Hanumantha Rao, 3 Bayya Sujatha, Wio Chengam Tirumalesh, 4 B. Ramesh, S/o B. Hanumantha Rao Petitioners (Petitioners in CRLP 6092 of 2017 on the file of High Court) AND 1 The State of A.P., rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Hyderabad. 2 V. Venkataiah, s/o v. venkata Krishnaiah, R/o D.No.15/794, B.P. Agraharam, Srikalahasthi, Chittoor District.

Respondents (Respondents in-do-) Counsel for the Petitioners: SRI C. MASTHAN NAIDU counsel for the Respondent No.1: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP) Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying that in the circumstances stated in the memorandum of grounds filed in Crl.P., the High Court may be pleased to stay all and further proceedings in C.C.No.521/2016 on the file of Additional Junior Civil Judge, Srlkalahasthi, Chittoor District, including appearance of the Petitioners/Accused No. 1 to 4, pending disposal of CRL.P.No.6092 of 2017 on the file of the High Court. The Court while directing issue of notice to the Respondent No.2 herein to show cause as to why this application should not be complied with, made the following order.(The receipt of this order will be deemed to be the receipt of notice in the case).

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners/A.1 to A.4, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and perused the record.

The learned counsel for the petitioners/A.1 to A.4 would submit that the defacto complainant has no /ocus standi to lodge a report against the petitioners/A.1 to A.4. Further, the wife of the de-facto complainant filed a suit in O.S.No.650 of 2002 on the file of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Srikalahasthi, Chittoor District, and lost the same, vide judgment, dated 21.03.2011, passed in the said suit. An appeal preferred against the dismissal of the suit, she did not get any relief and the said appeal was dismissed. ln order to harass the petitioners/A.1 to A.4, false allegations are made against them stating that they have committed forgery and fabricated the agreernent of sale, dated 25.08.2001. The suit was for specific performance of agreement of sale, dated 25.08.2001. The submissions made on behalf of the petitioners/A.1 to A.4 cannot be discarded at this juncture, require examination.

Under these circumstances, all further proceedings in C.C.No.521 of 20'16 on the file of Additional Junior Civil Judge, Srikaiahasti, Chittoor District, are stayed for a period of two (02) months.

Notice.

SD/- K. TATA RAO ASSISTANT RE TRAIl.

,TRUE COPY'

for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To

1. The Additional Junior Civil Judge, Srikalahasthi, Chrttoor District

2. V. Venkataiah, S/o V. Venkata Krishnaiah, R/o D.No.15/794, B.P. Agraharam, Srikalahasthi, Chittoor District. (BY RPAD) Two CCs to Public Prosecutor (AP, High Court of Hyderabad.(OUT)

3. One CC to Sri. C. t\,4asthan Naidu, Advocate (OPUC)

4. One Spare copy KK

HIGH COURT DR.SAJ DT. 15-3-2018

ORDER

1'

{) cRL.[/.P. NO 6207 0F 2A17 ti$ft IN cRL.P. NO. 6092 0F 2017 STAY 't