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

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
Syed Naseruddin – Appellant
Versus
State of Telangana – Respondent


ORDER:-

1. Heard the submission of the le'arned counsel for the petitioners/Accused Nos.2 & 3' Aiso heard the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor who is representing the lst respondent-State. [n the light of the limited request made' issuance of notice to the 2"d respondent is felt not nece ssary.

2. Seeking to quash the proceedings that are pending against the petitioners/ Accused Nos' 2 & 3 in CC'No'294 of 20 15, on the file of the Court of XV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at H,vderabad, the present Criminal Petition is filcd.

3 Learned counsel lor the petitioners submits that the petitioners 1& 2 are arrayed as Accused 2 & 3 in CC.No.294 of 20 1.5 that is pending on the file of the Court of XV Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad' Learned counsel also states that the petitioners are aged more than 60 vears and thel are unable to attend the Court and the prdcecciings are pencirng since 20i5 and hence, no further orders in this Criminal Petition are required, excgpt to -.-. ,\

'l Dr.CsL.J C.l.P.\0.6981 of202r dispense with the personal appea-rance of the petitioners before the trial Court and directing the trial Court to dispose of the Calendar Case time bound.

4. No objection, wha

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top