Back
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
Judge Name, J
Padi Venkateswarlu v. State of A.P.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the context and background of the criminal petition under s.482 cr.p.c. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments for and against the quashing of the fir. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 3. legal analysis regarding abetment and relevant sections. (Para 7 , 8 , 10 , 12) |
| 4. judicial determination on the lack of grounds for the fir. (Para 15 , 17) |
| 5. final verdict of the court. (Para 18) |
1. In the present Criminal Petition, filed under S.482 Cr.P.C., petitioners, who are the accused in Cr.No.140 of 2013 of Rajupalem Police Station, Guntur, are praying for quashment of the First Information Report registered against them for the alleged offences under S.306 r/w 34 IPC.
2. Heard both sides and perused the entire material available on record.
3. Though, initially, the First Information Report came to be registered under S.174 Cr.P.C., subsequently, the same had been altered by incorporating S.306 r/w 34 IPC.
4. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the very registration of the crime under the said provisions of law is a patent abuse of process of law. In elaboration, it is further contended that there are absolutely no ingredients of the above Sections of law in the entire complaint, as such, co
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
