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

2024 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 30834

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
E. V. VENUGOPAL, J
P. Neeraj Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
CRLRC/493/2019



THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.493 of 2019

ORDER:

The present criminal revision case is filed to setaside the order dated 22.04.2019 passed in Crl.MP.Sr.No.982 of 2019 in M.C.No.27 of 2017 on the file of XV Additional District Judge- cum-XV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-II Additional Family Court Judge, Kukatpally by returning the petition filed under Section 126(2) of Cr.P.C. seeking to setaside the order dated 12.04.2019.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner as well as learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent No.1-State, there is no representation on behalf of leaned counsel appearing for the unofficial respondents and Perused the record.

3. A perusal of the record shows that the petitioner filed a petition under section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C. before the learned XV Additional District Judge-cum-XV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-II Additional Family Court Judge, Kukatpally, Ranga Reddy District seeking to setaside the exparte order dated 12.04.2019. But the learned XV Additional District Judge-cum-XV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-II Additional Family Court Judge, Kukatpally, Ranga Reddy District passed orders stating that ‘the petitioner has to comply the orders of this Court dated 25.03.2019 and the orders of the Hon’ble High court. Hence the said petition has been returned for compliance.’

4. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that this Court vide order dated 27.04.2022 in Crl.R.C (SR) No.3198 of 2022 held that as against an interlocutory order, a Revision under Section 397 of Criminal Procedure Code is not maintainable. Therefore, seeks to dismiss the Revision.

5. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Criminal Revision Case at this stage, as the proceedings hereunder are covered by the order dated

27.04.2022 in Crl.R.C (SR) No.3198 of 2022 passed by this Court.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to work out the remedies available under law.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall also stand closed.

____________________________

JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL Dated: 30.04.2024 ksl

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top