Andhra Pradesh High Court
CRLP/103/2015 of KANEMAR MOHAMMED ALI, VISAKHAPATNAM., Vs BIBI AASIYA TABASSUM, SRIKAKULAM & ANR, REP PP., on 6 August 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3239] FRIDAY, THE 7th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 103/2015 Between: KANEMAR MOHAMMED ALI, VISAKHAPATNAM.,, S/O. LATE ABDUL KHADIR HAJI, OCC:SELF EMPLOYMENT,
APHC010546032015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY, THE 7th DAY OF AUGUST 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 103/2015
Between:
KANEMAR MOHAMMED ALI, VISAKHAPATNAM.,, S/O. LATE
ABDUL KHADIR HAJI, OCC:SELF EMPLOYMENT, R/O.D.NO.23- 14-32, KIRAN ENCLAVE, SOLDIERPETA, I TOWN AREA, VISAKHAPATNAM-530001
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. BIBI AASIYA TABASSUM SRIKAKULAM ANR REP PP, OCC:
M.SC M.PHIL, R/O. PLOT NO.4, SBI STAFF COLONY, CHINNA
BONDILIPURAM, SRIKAKULAM DISTRICT.
2. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR,
HIGH
COURT
OF
JUDICATURE
AT
HYDERABAD.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. V RAGHU
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. A RAVI SHANKAR
2. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR (AP)
The Court made the following
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 :-
This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner/respondent, under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking to quash the proceedings in Crl.M.P No.172 of 2013 in M.C No.1 of 2013 on the file of the Family Court-cum-III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Srikakulam.
2. No representation on behalf of the petitioner. Even on earlier occasion also, there was no representation. Though the matter is listed under the caption “For Dismissal”, learned counsel for the petitioner did not choose to appear. It seems that the petitioner has no interest in prosecuting the present Criminal Petition.
3. In view of the same, the present Criminal Petition is dismissed for default.
As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ K.SURESH REDDY,J
Dt. 07.08.2026 SAB
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K SURESH REDDY
CRIMINAL PETITION No.103 OF 2015
Dt. 07.08.2026
SAB