D. V. S. S. SOMAYAJULU
M. Hanumantha Rao – Appellant
Versus
State of Andhra Pradesh and Kundurthi Gurava Chary – Respondent
ORDER :
D.V.S.S. Somayajulu, J.
1. Both the Criminal Petitions are filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to quash the docket order dated 11.07.2019 passed in CFR.No.789 of 2019 by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Piduguralla, Guntur District.
2. This Court has heard Sri Ponsani Venkateswarlu, learned counsel for the petitioner representing both Sri P. Sai Surya Teja and Sri Ancha Pandu Ranga Rao for the petitioners. The learned Advocate General appeared for the 1st respondent-State. For the 2nd respondent learned counsel Sri V. Sai Kumar appeared.
3. With the consent of all the counsel, the main criminal petitions itself were taken up for hearing.
4. In both the criminal petitions, IA.No.2 is filed for stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the docket order dated 11.07.2019 passed in CFR.No.789 of 2019 by the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Piduguralla. The main criminal petitions are filed challenging the said docket order. In Crl.P.No.4642 of 2019, petitioner is the second accused and in Crl.P.No.4560 of 2019, petitioner is the 8th accused. In both the applications, the 2nd respondent is the de-facto complainant.
5. Sri Posani Venkateswarlu, learned counsel commenced his arguments
Priyanka Srivastava v. State of U.P.
Dilawar Singh v. State of Delhi
Srinivas Gundluri v. SEPCO Electric Power Construction Corporation
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.