Back
HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
JUVVADI SRIDEVI, J
ShaShaik Sahiq – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. fir not maintainable (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. innocence of petitioners (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. complaint by de facto complainant (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. lack of proper complaint (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. proceedings quashed (Para 11) |
COMMON ORDER
As these Criminal Petitions are arising out of same crime, they are being disposed of by way of this Common Order.
02. These Criminal Petitions are filed by the petitioners- accused Nos.1 and 2 to quash the proceedings against them in Crime No.1647 of 2024 of the Station House Officer, Miyapur Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offences under Sections 223 of BNS (Section 188 of IPC) and 20(2) of the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 (for short ‘COTPA’).
03. Heard Sri Syed Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioners-accused Nos.1 and 2 and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
04. Learned counsel appearing for petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. Section 195(1)(a) of Cr.P.C. bars taking cognizance of the offence under Section 22
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
