K V. Ramarah v. Hyderabad
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
this Criminal Petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Having regard to the subsequent developments in thc proceeclings, and as the petitioner may be required to recast and appropriatelv strategize his pleadings, liberty 1S granted to the petitior-rer to file ar-r appropriate application to challenge thc consequential proceedings, if so advised. With the…
Judgment
Cause title
Respondents
/Defacto Com plainant Petition under section 482 of cr p.c. praying that in the crrcLrmstances stated rn the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition. the High court may be pleased to pleased to Quash the F r R.No 442 of 2022 dt. i 9.1 i.2022 on re file of the P.S Shameerpet, Cyberabad police Comm issionerate, registered for the offences under Sections 387, 506 of rpc against the petrtio.erlAccused No 5 in the interest of justice l.A. NO: 2 OF 2024 Petition under Section 482 of cr p c. prayrng that rn the crrcumstances stated in the l\/emorandrm of Grounds of crirninal petition, the High court m:ry be pleased to Grant stay of a further proceedrngs in F r.R No-442 of 2022 dt.19 11 2022 on the fire of the p.s. Shameerpet cyberabad poiice commrssionerate, registered for the offences under sectrons 387, 506 of lpc against the petitio ne r/Accu sed No 5, including arrest of the petitioner/Accused No.5 herein, pending drsposal of the main Criminal petition. Thrs Petitron coming on for hearing upon perusing the [Vlerrorandunr of Grounds of criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of l\/r NALLA IMUKUNDA REDDY, Advocate for the petitioner Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the AISHWARAYA, Advocate for Respondent No.2. and IVlr E GANESH, Respondent No.1 and 4,4 r The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI cRIMINAL PETITION No.1 ss oF 2024 D ATE: 04.02.2026 Between: I(.V.Rarrraialr The Stirtc of Tclarlganlr and anothcr. AND
ORDER:
... Petitioner-accused No. 5 ...Respondents Tlris (lrii:rirrerl I'cLitir>tr is filed under Section 528 oI the Bharerlir a Nrtgtrri)< Sttr aksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking quashment of lhe proccerlings irqrtit-tst tl-rc' pctitioner accLtsed No.5 in Crime No 442 of 20)). rlzrt<'cl I 9.ll .)O2'2 on the file of the Shameerpet ['olice Station. C-r'bc riLiti rcl Polrt:c ()omm issionel'atc.
'lhc pclitlotle t' rs :lrrer]'ed :rs accusecl No'5 in Crime No'1'12 o[ 2O22, registcred lor the olfences punishable under Sectiorrs 387 and 5O6 of Indinr-r Penarl Code.
None appeared on behalf of the petitioner Learned Aclclitional Public Prosecutor submits that a charge
sheet has been 1l1cd against the petitioner before the learned 2 - Additional Junior Civil Judge, Medchal, and the same has been taken on file as C.C.No .45 of 2025.
Operative part
Having regard to the subsequent developments in thc proceeclings, and as the petitioner may be required to recast and appropriatelv strategize his pleadings, liberty 1S granted to the petitior-rer to file ar-r appropriate application to challenge thc consequential proceedings, if so advised. With the aforesaid libertl , this Criminal Petition is disposed of. As a sequel, pending miscellaleous applications, if any, shall stand closed. i! SD/- N.CHANDRA SEKHAR RAO DEPUTY REGISTRAR 6 //TRUE COPYII SECTION OFFICER To. 1 The Vll Addl. lv4etropolitan l\,4agistrate at [/ledchal, Cyberabad 2. the Station House Officer, Shameerpet Police Station, Cyberabad' 3. fwo CCs to the Public Prosecutor, Hrgh Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad [OUT] 4 One CC to l\ilr. NATLA [/IUKUNDA REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to tvlr AISHWARAYA, Advocate, [OPUC] 6 Two CD CoPies R..(/PSt. w HIGH COURT DATED: 0410212026 ,.\ ':{ \\\\ l;\ ':.l r-.) 1L 1 ItU -\' * I iL )! ORDER CRLP.No.155 of 2024 Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is Disposed of. 4roP(ez\
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: this Criminal Petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.