P. Padmavathi v. State of A.P
Case at a glance
- Bench
- G V SEETHAPATHI
Provisions considered
Judgment
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHI CRIMINAL PETITION No. 462 OF 2009 Between:
2. P. Padmavathi, W/o A. Ram Mohan Rao Mekala Ram Mohan Rao, S/o Papaiah Petitioners/Accused Nos.4 & 5 AND
State of A.P., rep. by Inspector of Police, CID, WPC, Hyderabad, through Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad
Perugu Laxmi Bhavani W/o P. Sri Venkateswara Yadav, R/o H. No. 19-22, Kalyanpuri, Uppal Road, Hyderabad. Respondents/Defacto complainant Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying that this Honourable Court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.256 of 2008 on the file of II Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, L. B. Nagar, Ranga Reddy District for the Offences U/s. 498-A, 406 IPC and Section 4 & 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act; The petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the memorandum of grounds filed herein and order of High Court dated 4-2-2009 and 05-03-2009 made herein and upon hearing the arguments of Smt. K. Sesharajyam, Advocate for the Petitioners and of Public Prosecutor for the Respondent No.1, and of Sri. N.V. Anantha Krishna, Advocate for the Respondent No.2, the Court made the following ORDER: “Heard the learned counsel for the respondent. To hear the petitioner’s counsel, at request post after two weeks, under the caption ‘for orders’. Interim stay granted earlier is extended till then.” // TRUE COPY // ASSISTANT REGISTRAR for ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To
BRT The II Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, L.B. Nagar, Ranga Reddy District The Inspector of Police, CID, Women Police Station, Hyderabad. Two CCs to Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad. (OUT) One spare copy. One CC to Smt. K. Sesharajyam, Advocate (OPUC) HIGH COURT GVSJ DT. 30-3-2009 NOTE: POST AFTER TWO WEEKS ORDER CRL.P.NO.462 OF 2009 EXTENDING THE INTERIM ORDER BRT DRAFTED ON: 31-03-2009 HIGH COURT GVSJ DT. 30-3-2009 NOTE: POST AFTER TWO WEEKS ORDER CRL.P.NO.462 OF 2009 EXTENDING THE INTERIM ORDER
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.