Mirza Farooq Baig v. Shabana Firdouse
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY, THE TWENTY NINTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENWTHREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO: 201 0F 2024 Criminal Revision Case under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.p.C to set aside the order d1j2-09-2015 passed in Crl.M.P.No.6212015 in M.C.No.15/20.15 on the file of the Honorable Court of the Judge, Family Court-cum- Additional District and Sessions Court., Nizamabad.
Between:
Mirza Farooq Baig, S/o Late Mirza Vazeer Baig, aged about 49 years, Occ. Home Guard No.1 85 at Bodhan, R/o Police Quarter No.30, Bodhan Town, Nizamabad District.
... PETITIONERYRESPONDENT AND
1. Shabana Firdouse, Wo Mirza Farooq Baig, Aged about 30 years, Occ. Household, R/o presently H.No.9-20-1507, Near Umar Masjld, Auto Nagar, Nizamabad.
...RespondenUPetitioner.
2. The State of Telangana, rep by P.P, Hyderabad, High Court at Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENTS/Respondents l.A NO: 2 OF 2016(CRLRCMP. NO:27 31 0F 2016) 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 stay all fu(her proceedings in pursuance of order passed in Cd.M.P. No.63/2015 in M.C.No.1512015, dt: 12-09-2015 on the file of the Court of the Hon'ble the Judge, Family Court-cum- Additional District and Sessions Court., Nizamabad pending disposal of the Crl.R.C.
Gounsel for the Petitioner : SRl. VANAM VISHWANATHAM Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI V.S.K.RAMA RAO Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI VIZARATH ALl, ASST. PUBLTC PROSECUTOR (TG) The Court made the following ORDER:
- ;-7 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.2OL OF 2024 ORDER:
This Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 397 and 407 of Cr.P.C seeking to set aside the order in CrI.M.P.No.63 of 2015 in M.C.No.15 of 2015, dated 12.09.2015 passed by the Family Court-cum-Additional District and \ \ 0I Sessions Court at Nizamabad.
2.
Heard the learned counsel lor the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondentState. 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the catrse in the present criminal revision case does not suwive for adjudication as the parties to this criminal revision case have settled the issues outside the Court. Therefore, no further orders are required and hence seeks to dismiss the same as infructuous 4.
Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent-State is present and takes no objection to the same.
5.
Taking on record the submissions made by the learned counsei for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent-State, this criminal revision case is dismissed as infirrctuous.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this criminal revision case, shall stand closed I sd/- T. KRISHNA KUMAR DEPUTY REGIST //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To,
1. The Judge, Family Court-cum- Additional District and Sessions Court' Nizamabad 2.TwoCCstoPUBL|CPRoSEoUToR'HighCourtfortheStateofTelangana at Hyderabad [OUT]
3. One CC to SRI.VANAM VISHWANATHAM, Advocate [OPUC]
4. One CC to SRI.V S K RAMA RAO, Advocate [OPUC]
5. Two CD coPies.
Cvk/kam
/I HIGH COURT DATED:2911212023 I
ORDER
s r€ r € ()z C;
^ CRLRC.N o.201 ot 2024 o (J 1 I APR 2024 {+ t e9 FA t DE t{ s c T CRLRC is Dismissed as Infructuous.
alql M 2Y