Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati

Goriparthi Hochmen, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 19 July, 2021

           HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI
                    MAIN CASE NO.: Crl.P.No.3980 of 2021
                             PROCEEDING SHEET

Sl.                                                                         OFFICE
        Date                             ORDER
No.                                                                          NOTE

01    19.07.2021   LK,J

                                   Crl.P.No.3980 of 2021


                          Admit.
                          Notice.
                          Learned Public Prosecutor takes notice
                   on behalf of 1st respondent.

Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take out personal notice to the 2nd respondent by RPAD and file proof of service.

Post after four weeks.

___________ LK, J I.A.No.1 of 2021 Heard.

For the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, filing of certified copy of C.C.No.3842 of 2020 is dispensed with. Accordingly, this petition is ordered.

___________ LK, J I.A.No.2 of 2021 Heard.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that if all the allegations in the charge sheet are taken on its face value, they do not attract the alleged offences under Sections 354C, 506 & 509 of IPC. He submits that the only allegation against the petitioner is that on 19.08.2020 the petitioner came to the hotel and took photographs of defacto complainant and others working outside the hotel and abused the complainant in filthy language. He submits that the petitioner did not commit any offence. He submits that earlier the petitioner gave complaint against the co-sister of defacto complainant, who is running hotel and basing on the said complaint, the Superintendent of GGH, Vijayawada issued proceedings on 28.01.2021. He further submits that the petitioner has been implicated in this case and prima facie, the allegations do not attract any offence against the petitioner.

This Court has gone through the complaint, charge sheet and statement given by the complainant, prima facie it appears that the allegations in respect of Section 354C of IPC are not attracted. Hence, there shall be stay of all further proceedings in C.C.No.3842 of 2020 on the file of II Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada.

___________ LK, J PVD