Back
HIGH COURT OF TELANGANA
K. LAKSHMAN, J
Sri Rajesh Maddy – Appellant
Versus
CBI – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case including petitioner details. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 2. petitioners' arguments regarding ownership and necessity. (Para 7 , 8 , 10) |
| 3. court's observations on maintainability of petitions. (Para 12 , 22 , 30 , 48) |
| 4. legal standards for interlocutory orders and custody laws. (Para 15 , 19 , 26 , 36) |
| 5. conclusion and dismissal of criminal petitions. (Para 49) |
COMMON ORDER
Heard Ms. Jayasree Narasimhan, learned counsel representing Sri Rajesh Maddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Srinivasa Rao Kapatia, learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI.
2-a) Crl.P.No. 10450 of 2017 is filed under Section 482 of CrPC by the petitioner/accused No.2 (A.2) in C.C.No.1 of 2016 challenging the order dated 25.10.2016 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1660 of 2016 in C.C.No.1 of 2012 in R.C.No.17(A) of 2009-CBI/Hyderabad, by the Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad, and to set aside the same.
2-b) Crl.P.No. 10915 of 2022 is filed by the petitioner, daughter of A.2, challenging the order dated 05.09.2022 passed in Crl.M.P.No.2379 of 2022 in the said C.C.No.1 of 2012 and to set aside the same.
2-c) Crl.P.No. 10917 of 2022 is filed by the petitioner, son of
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
