Telangana High Court
CRLP/3095/2010 of Jannu Bixapathi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh, on 29 December 2011
SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.3095 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioners 1 to 6/A1 to A6 are accused of offence punishable under Section 324/34 I.P.C. It is contended by the petitioners’ counsel that this case is filed as counter blast for case filed by the sixth
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULUCRIMINAL PETITION No.3095 OF 2010
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.
ORDER:
The petitioners 1 to 6/A1 to A6 are accused of offencepunishable under Section 324/34 I.P.C. It is contended by thepetitioners’ counsel that this case is filed as counter blast forcase filed by the sixth petitioner/A6 alleging offences underSections 498A I.P.C. etc., against the second respondent/defacto complainant and his other family members. When thesecond respondent and his family members went to attend10[th] day function after death of A6’s father, it is alleged that A1to A6 and ten others pounced upon the second respondentand others and beat them indiscriminately making heavy fistblows etc. Wound Certificate of the second respondent filedby the police shows two external simple injuries on his body. Itis contended by the petitioners’ counsel that the secondrespondent and his family members were uninvited guests forthe function and that taking advantage of small incident, omnibus allegations were made against A1 to A6. The petitioners’counsel requested this Court to go through specific allegationsagainst each of the accused and determine the liability. ThisCourt in this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot undertake sifting of evidence and sifting of the accused. It isfor the trial Court to do the said exercise after recording theentire evidence to be let in by both the parties. It is sufficient tosay at this stage that there are no grounds to interfere with trialof the case in this Criminal Petition.
Hence, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
_____________________________
SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J
December 29, 2011MD
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3095 OF 2010
December 29, 2011
MD
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDRABAD
Dated: 29.12.2011
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALAGOVINDARAJULU
CRIMINAL PETITION No.3095 OF 2010
Between:
Jannu Bixapathi and others
..... PETITIONERS
AND
The State of Andhra Pradesh and another
The Court made the following:
....RESPONDENTS