IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
Smt. Anthony Maria Shalat – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
CRLP 6957/2025
ORDER
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS, 2023’) seeking quashment of the order, dated 19.03.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.348 of 2025 in Crl.M.P.No.1685 of 2024 in Crl.A.No.1341 of 2024.
2. Heard Mr. Syed Lateef, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Appellate Court, by order dated 08.10.2024 in Crl.M.P. No.1685 of 2024, directed the petitioner/accused to deposit 20% of the compensation amount within a period of sixty (60) days. However, the petitioner was unable to comply within the stipulated time due to financial constraints. Consequently, he filed Crl.M.P. No.348 of 2025 seeking an extension of time for compliance, supported by a Fixed Deposit Receipt dated
29.01.2025 as evidence of readiness to fulfill the order.
Significantly, the respondent/complainant filed a memo expressing no objection to the extension sought by the petitioner. Despite this concurrence, the Appellate Court, by its impugned order dated 19.03.2025, rejected the petitioner's request on the ground that it lacked the jurisdiction to extend the time beyond the prescribed ninety (90) days.
Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner prays for the impugned rejection order to be set aside, contending that the refusal to enlarge time despite the respondent’s consent and the petitioner’s bona fide efforts results in a miscarriage of justice.
4. Upon perusal of the material on record and considering the submissions advanced, it is observed that the petitioner has already complied, at least in part, with the directions issued in Crl.M.P. No.1685 of 2024. Notably, he has secured a Fixed Deposit Receipt (FDR) dated 29.01.2025 toward fulfilling the remaining portion. In view of the same, permitting the petitioner to deposit the FDR in lieu of of compliance with the earlier order, is considered appropriate to address the grievance raised and to meet the interests of justice.
Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the petitioner is directed to deposit the aforementioned FDR before the Appellate Court on or before 23.06.2025. Upon such deposit, the Appellate Court shall record the compliance of the direction issued in Crl.M.P. No.1685 of
2024 and thereafter proceed with the appeal in accordance with law.
5. With this direction, this Criminal Petition is allowed.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________________
218
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.