Criminal Petition No. 9077 of 2009 · Andhra Pradesh High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
5) Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 482
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 409, 425, 427, 448, 504
Judgment
Operative part
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SWAROOP REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION No.9077 OF 2009 ORDER : This criminal petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is filed by the petitioner/A.1 seeking to quash proceedings against him C.C.No.602 of 2008 on the file of the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, for the offence punishable under sections 427, 448, 425, 504 and 409 I.P.C. 2) Heard. 3) The main contention of the petitioner is that initially the private complaint filed by the de facto complainant/second respondent was referred to Police and after investigation they filed a report stating that there was no evidence. Subsequently, on filing a protest petition by the second respondent, the trail Court took cognizance of the offence. 4) But, a reading of the report submitted by the Police reveals that there was substantial material against the petitioner, but as there was some understanding between the parties for settlement, Police have reported that there was no evidence. Such being the case, the complainant cannot be prevented when he wants to pursue the matter by filing the protest petition. Therefore, it is not a fit case for quashing the proceedings. 5) Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed. 4th November, 2009 SUR ______________________ P.SWAROOP REDDY, J
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: 5) Accordingly, the criminal petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 409, 425, 427, 448, 504.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 04 Nov 2009. The bench was P SWAROOP REDDY.
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.