SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(AP) 223

P.S.NARAYANA
M. D. Prabhakar – Appellant
Versus
Kanisetty @ Panda Jyothi Durga Bhavani – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:------. For the Respondents: ------.

Judgment :

ORDER:-

1. Heard Sri M. Christopher representing Sri T.Pradyumna Kumar Reddy, the learned Counsel representing petitioners –A.13 and A.14, Sri Raghu, the learned Counsel representing the 1st respondent and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the 2nd respondent.

2. The Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter in short referred to as ‘the Code’ for the purpose of convenience) by A.13 and A.14 in C.C.No.170/2007 on the file of the II-Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, Krishna District, praying for quashing of the proceedings.

3. The 1st respondent is a practicing Advocate at Vijayawada. A.1 also is a practicing Advocate and they belong to different castes. On 13-5-98 they were married. The parents of both the parties did not attend the marriage. Out of their wed-lock, a male child was born on 19-10-99. Gradually the parents of A.1 developed intimacy with the 1st respondent. A.1 and his family also used to visit the parents of A.1 along with the child. After some time, A.1 started harassing the 1st respondent along with the active support of his parents and relatives and demanded Rs.5 lakhs a









































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top