Telangana High Court
CRLP/4291/2007 of Ramesh Chand Agarwal, Vs The State of A.P., on 30 December 2010
A . GOPAL REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.4290 and 4291 of 2007 DATE:30-12-2010 CRIMINAL PETITION No.4290 OF 2007 BETWEEN Ramesh Chand Agarwal and another …Petitioners AND The State of A.P., through Public Prosecutor and another …Respondents CRIMINAL PETITION No.4291 OF 2007 BETWEEN
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.4290 and 4291 of 2007
DATE:30-12-2010
CRIMINAL PETITION No.4290 OF 2007
BETWEEN
Ramesh Chand Agarwal and another
AND
…Petitioners
The State of A.P., through Public Prosecutor and another …Respondents CRIMINAL PETITION No.4291 OF 2007
BETWEEN
Ramesh Chand Agarwal and another
AND
…Petitioners
The State of A.P., through Public Prosecutor and another …Respondents THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. GOPAL REDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION Nos.4290 & 4291 OF 2007
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
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.
COMMON ORDER:
The only ground on which the petitioners seeks to quash theproceedings pending before II Metropolitan Magistrate, RangareddyDistrict, Hyderabad for the offences punishable under Sections 406,420 and 506 IPC is that earlier a case in F.I.R.No.937 of 2005 on thefile of Saroornagar Police Station was registered in which final reportwas filed on 26.02.2006 by the police stating that the offence is of civilnature. Therefore, taking cognizance of the case by the Magistrate onthe 2[nd] complaint, is abuse of process and the same is liable to bequashed.
When it is brought to the notice of the learned counsel for thepetitioners that a second complaint is not barred and in stead of filing aprotest petition the same can be filed in the form of a fresh complaint,which can be treated as a protest petition, as held by the Hon’bleSupreme Court in Mahesh Chandra v. B.Janardhan Reddy[[1]],learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw thecriminal petitions stating that if any observation is passed on merits itmay influence the Magistrate to decide the cases.
Permission is accorded.
The Criminal Petitions are, accordingly, dismissed aswithdrawn.
______________________
A. GOPAL REDDY, J
December 30, 2010LMV
[1]2003 (1) SCC 734