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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 70150

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA
Narala Vijay Krishna – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana – Respondent
CRLP 11231/2025



THE HON’BLE SMT. JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.11231, 11232, 11233, 11265, 11267, 11268, 11273, 11275 and 11278 OF 2025

COMMON ORDER:

Crl.P.No.11231 of 2025 is filed by the petitioner – accused No.3 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.61 of 2022 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial Cases under Economic Offences, CBI Court Complex, Nampally at Hyderabad, registered for the offence under Section 7(6) read with Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013.

2. Crl.P.No.11232 of 2025 is filed by the petitioner – accused No.3 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.68 of 2022 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial Cases under Economic Offences, CBI Court Complex, Nampally at Hyderabad, registered for the offence under Section 7(6) read with Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013.

3. Crl.P.No.11233 of 2025 is filed by the petitioner – accused No.3 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.69 of 2022 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial Cases under Economic Offences, CBI Court Complex, Nampally at Hyderabad, registered for the offence under Section 7(6) read with Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013.

4. Crl.P.No.11265 of 2025 is filed by the petitioner – accused No.3 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.85 of 2022 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial Cases under Economic Offences, CBI Court Complex, Nampally at Hyderabad, registered for the offence under Section 7(6) read with Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013.

5. Crl.P.No.11267 of 2025 is filed by the petitioner – accused No.3 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.62 of 2022 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial Cases under Economic Offences, CBI Court Complex, Nampally at Hyderabad, registered for the offence under Section 7(6) read with Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013.

6. Crl.P.No.11268 of 2025 is filed by the petitioner – accused No.3 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.65 of 2022 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial Cases under Economic Offences, CBI Court Complex, Nampally at Hyderabad, registered for the offence under Section 7(6) read with Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013.

7. Crl.P.No.11273 of 2025 is filed by the petitioner – accused No.3 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.63 of 2022 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial Cases under Economic Offences, CBI Court Complex, Nampally at Hyderabad, registered for the offence under Section 7(6) read with Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013.

8. Crl.P.No.11275 of 2025 is filed by the petitioner – accused No.3 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.64 of 2022 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial Cases under Economic Offences, CBI Court Complex, Nampally at Hyderabad, registered for the offence under Section 7(6) read with Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013.

9. Crl.P.No.11278 of 2025 is filed by the petitioner – accused No.3 seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.67 of 2022 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial Cases under Economic Offences, CBI Court Complex, Nampally at Hyderabad, registered for the offence under Section 7(6) read with Section 447 of the Companies Act, 2013.

10. Since the petitioner is the accused No.3 in all the petitions, they are heard together and disposed off by way of this common order. Heard the submissions of Sri L.Harish, learned counsel representing Sri Praveen Kumar Challa, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B.Narasimha Sharma, learned Additional Solicitor General of India for respondent No.2 and Sri R.R.Mangulal, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 in Crl.P.No.11273 of 2025.

11. The learned petitioner counsel has submitted that the allegations do not attract the ingredients of Section 7(6) of the Companies Act, 2013 and that accused No.3 is the Company Secretary and accused No.4 is the Company. He further submitted that the allegations that the company is not functioning at the given address and

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