Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 762 (TS)

Kunru Vamshi Goud v. State Of Telangana

2020-11-11

K.LAKSHMAN

body2020
JUDGMENT K. Lakshman, J. - This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.400 of 2016 pending on the file of I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mancherial. The petitioner is A.3 in the said C.C.No.400 of 2016. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 120(b), 420, 468 and 471 of IPC. 2. Heard Sri S. Kondadi Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor and perused the record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is not aware of the pendency of the said case against him. The entire charge sheet does not disclose that the Police have invoked procedure laid down under Section 41-A Cr.P.C., and even then they have tried to apprehend the petitioner herein and tried to serve the notice under Section 41- A Cr.P.C. The computer generated status in the said Calender Case, would disclose that Non Bailable Warrants were issued against the petitioner/A.3. 4. On perusal of the charge sheet would reveal that the allegation against the petitioner/A.3 is that he is the owner of Vibrant jobs and A.2 is his associate. The petitioner is running consultancy at Hyderabad. In the charge sheet, it is also specifically mentioned that he has also committed the said offences. 5. Considering the said facts, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.400 of 2016 pending on the file of I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mancherial. 6. Therefore, the Criminal Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner/A.3 to file an application before the Court below under Section 70(2) Cr.P.C. seeking to recall the Non Bailable Warrant issued against him in the said C.C.No.400 of 2016. The learned I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mancherial, shall consider the same and recall the N.B.W issued against the petitioner/A.3 on imposing certain conditions to its satisfaction. It is also made clear that the petitioner/A.3 shall appear before the Court below in the said Calender Case and shall cooperate with the trial Court in concluding the trial. Miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.