Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Chintala Yadagiri vs The State Of Telangana on 24 February, 2025
Author: Abhay S. Oka
Bench: Abhay S. Oka
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S).942 OF 2025
(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (CRIMINAL) NO(S).12996/2024)
CHINTALA YADAGIRI APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S).943 OF 2025
(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (CRIMINAL) NO(S).17148/2024)
O R D E R
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.942 OF 2025 @ SLP (CRL.) NO.12996/2024
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, the
learned counsel appearing for the State and the learned senior
counsel appearing for the third respondent who is an accused.
3. The appellant is the first informant. A First Information
Report (for short, “the FIR”) was registered at the instance of the
appellant for the offences punishable under Section 406, 420, 504
and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(2)(va) and
Section 3(1)(r) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. A petition for quashing of
the FIR was filed by the third respondent before the High Court.
By the impugned judgment, the High Court has declined to quash the
FIR on the ground that the investigation was pending.
Signature Not Verified
However, the
Digitally signed by
ASHISH KONDLE
Date: 2025.03.01
15:55:54 IST
Reason:
1
High Court granted protection from arrest to the third respondent.
4. The grievance of the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant was that after dismissing the petition under Section 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of the FIR,
the High Court ought not have granted protection from arrest to the
third respondent. His submission is that the petition ought to
have been dismissed simplicitor.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the State has filed an
affidavit of the concerned Police Officer. In the affidavit, it is
disclosed that the investigation is almost complete and what
remains is the collection of certain documents from the Registrar
General of the High Court for the State of Telangana. He states
that charge-sheet is likely to be filed within two weeks.
6. Therefore, now the investigation is at final stage. The
Registrar General of the High Court for the State of Telangana is
bound to cooperate with the Assistant Commissioner of Police who is
investigating into the offence. Now that the charge-sheet will be
filed, the remedies of the third respondent to challenge the
charge-sheet or apply for discharge will remain open.
7. It is true that the High Court while dismissing the petition
for quashing of the FIR ought not have protected the third
respondent from arrest. Now that the investigation is nearly
complete, after filing of the charge-sheet, arrest of the third
respondent will not be required.
2
8. Hence, we pass the following order:
i. As and when the charge-sheet is filed, the remedies
of the third respondent to seek quashing of the
charge-sheet or to apply for discharge are kept
open;
ii. After the third respondent receives a notice from
the concerned Court of filing of the charge-sheet,
he shall appear before the concerned Court and he
shall be forthwith enlarged on bail on appropriate
terms and conditions; and
iii. Till the date on which the third respondent is
enlarged on bail as aforesaid, the protection
against arrest granted to the third respondent under
the impugned order, shall continue to operate.
9. We make it clear that we have made no adjudication on the
merits of the controversy as well as the allegations made against
the third respondent.
10. Needless to add that it is for the Investigating Officer to
decide in what manner the final report should be filed in
accordance with law.
11. The Appeal is disposed of on the above terms.
3
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.943 OF 2025 @ SLP (CRL.) NO.17148/2024
1. Leave granted.
2. In view of the order passed in Criminal Appeal No.942 of 2025
@ SLP (Crl.) No.12996/2024, nothing survives in this Appeal. The
Appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.
……………………..J.
(ABHAY S. OKA)
……………………..J.
(UJJAL BHUYAN)
NEW DELHI;
FEBRUARY 24, 2025.
4
ITEM NO.36 COURT NO.4 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PETITION(S) FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CRL.) NO(S). 12996/2024
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 24-06-2024
in CRLP No. 1866/2024 passed by the High Court for the State of
Telangana at Hyderabad]
CHINTALA YADAGIRI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF TELANGANA & ORS. Respondent(s)
FOR ADMISSION
WITH
SLP(Crl) No. 17148/2024 (II)
Date : 24-02-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYANFor Petitioner(s): Mr. Nitin Meshram, Adv.
Mr. Saurabh Singh, Adv.
Mr. Rishi Raj Singh, Adv.
Mr. Ranbir Singh Yadav, AOR
Mr. Niranjan Reddy, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Mandeep Kalra, AOR
Mr. Vaibhav Yadav, Adv.
Ms. Anushna Satapathy, Adv.
Ms. Radhika Jalan, Adv.
Mr. Yashas J, Adv.
Ms. Widaphi Lyngdoh, Adv.
Ms. Anchita Nayyar, Adv.
Ms. Shefali Tripathi, Adv.
For Respondent(s): Ms. Devina Sehgal, AOR
Mr. S. Uday Bhanu, Adv.
Mr. Niranjan Reddy, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Mandeep Kalra, AOR
Mr. Vaibhav Yadav, Adv.
Ms. Anushna Satapathy, Adv.
5
Ms. Radhika Jalan, Adv.
Mr. Yashas J, Adv.
Ms. Widaphi Lyngdoh, Adv.
Ms. Anchita Nayyar, Adv.
Ms. Shefali Tripathi, Adv.
Ms. Akhila Palam, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E RLeave granted.
The Appeals are disposed of in terms of the signed order.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of
accordingly.
(ASHISH KONDLE) (AVGV RAMU) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
[THE SIGNED ORDER IS PLACED ON THE FILE]
6
[ad_1]
Source link