Md. Mahmeed Ali, v. The State Of Andhra Pradesh,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No. 3412 OF 2013 O R D E R:

This Court, by its order, dated 24.04.2013, permitted the learned counsel for the petitioners to take out notice to the 2nd respondent. Accordingly, the notice has been sent to the 2nd respondent on 20.08.2013, which has been returned to the learned counsel for the petitioners with a postal endorsement that the addressee refused to receive the notice. Similarly, the notice sent by the Registry also was refused to be received by the 2nd respondent. Hence, the 2nd respondent will be treated to have the necessary knowledge about the pendency of this Criminal Petition in this Court. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. After a considerable amount of debate at the Bar, the learned counsel, when urged by the Court, is graceful enough to accept the suggestion to counsel the petitioners to enter into an appropriate arrangement with the de facto complainant to bury peacefully and satisfactorily the disputes between the parties. I hope and I am also confident, knowing the ability of the learned counsel for the petitioners, that he would succeed in this mission.

The learned counsel for the petitioners has pointed out that this Petition is filed for quashing the proceedings in Crime No. 358 of 2012 on the file of Jagityal Police Station, Karimnagar District. However, the police after investigation, have already filed the charge sheet and it was numbered as C.C.No. 410 of 2013. Hence, the cause in this Criminal Petition does not survive for further adjudication. This Criminal Petition is therefore, dismissed. It goes without saying that the petitioners are at liberty to pursue all such remedies, which are available to them under law. Consequently, the miscellaneous applications, if any shall also stand dismissed.

----------------------------------------- NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J

24th June 2015 ksld