Telangana High Court
CRLP/15254/2013 of Mir Sanaullah , Aqeel Vs The State of A.P., rep. by P.P. on 31 December 2013
SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR Crl.P.No. 15254 of 2013 ORDER: This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking modification of the order dated 28.11.2013 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1676 of 2013 in C.C.No.702 of 2011 on the file of the learned XVII Metropolitan Magistrate,
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Arguments
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMARCrl.P.No. 15254 of 2013
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seekingmodification of the order dated 28.11.2013 passed in Crl.M.P.No.1676 of2013 in C.C.No.702 of 2011 on the file of the learned XVII MetropolitanMagistrate, Rajendra Nagar, Ranga Reddy District. A charge sheetcame to be registered against the accused and others for the offencepunishable under Sections 498-A and 323 IPC and Sections 4 and 6 ofDowry Prohibition Act.
While things stood thus, the petitioner herein filed an applicationfor return of his original passport bearing No. K 7399569 and soughtpermission to go to Jaddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
By order, dated 28.11.2013, the learned Magistrate allowed thesaid application in part, which reads as under:
“Following the judgment of the ApexCourt, this petition is allowed, howeversubject to the observation that it is open tothe respondent to approach the PassportAuthorities under Section10 or 10-A of thePassport Act of impounding of the Passportof the petitioner/A1 in accordance with law. With regard to the other relief in this petitioni.e., permission to proceed to Jeddah forextension of Visa, the same is rejected asthe N.B.W. against the petiotner/A1 ispending since two years which is recentlyexecuted.”
Challenging the above said order, the present Criminal Petition isfiled.
Learned counsel for the petitioner mainly submits that the petitioner, who is working in a private company in Jaddah has to getsome retirement benefits, and as such, it is very much necessary forhim to go to Jaddah for claiming the retirement benefits.
On the other hand, the respondent, who is appearing in-personstated that it is very difficult for him to procure the petitioner, if he leavesIndia, and as such, prays for dismissal of the present application.
A perusal of the material available on record would indicate thatN.B.W was pending against the petitioner since two years and recentlythe same were executed. Therefore, the apprehension of the respondentcannot be brushed aside. At the same time, the threat of the petitionerwith regard to withholding of his benefits if he does not go to Jaddah,cannot be overlooked.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, it wouldbe appropriate to direct the learned XVII Metropolitan Magistrate,Rajendra Nagar, Ranga Reddy District to dispose of C.C. No. 702 of2011 pending on his file, as expeditiously, as possible, preferably withina period of five (05) weeks from today. The respondent is directed tocooperate with the trial of the case and see that the same is disposed ofwithin the time fixed above. In case, the trial Court could not becompleted within the period mentioned above due to non-cooperation ofthe prosecution witnesses, the petitioner is at liberty to renew theapplication before the trial Court.
With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending, ifany, shall stand closed.
__________________________________
JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR.
Note:C.C. day after tomorrow.B/oGvl
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
Crl.P.No. 15254 of 2013
Gvl
Date : 31-12-2013