Pathri Pochaiah vs The State Of Telangana
2025 Latest Caselaw 2068 Tel

Telangana High Court

Pathri Pochaiah vs The State Of Telangana on 12 February, 2025

                                  1



       THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

            CRIMINAL PETITION No.12508 OF 2023

O R D E R:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner/de facto

complainant seeking to quash the order dated 12.10.2023 in

Crl.M.P.No.537 of 2023 in Spl.S.C.No.23 of 2016 on the file of the

learned Special Sessions Judge For Trial of Cases under the

SCs/STs (PoA) Act-cum-II Additional Sessions Judge, Nizamabad

(for short, "the trial Court") wherein the learned Judge of the trial

Court had dismissed the application filed by the petitioner

seeking to receive certain documents and recall PW1 for marking

the same.

2. Heard Mr.B.Karthik Navayan, learned counsel for the

petitioner, Mr.E.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor

appearing for respondent No.1-State and Mr.N.Srushman Reddy,

learned counsel for unofficial respondent Nos.2 to 8.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is the

accused in Spl.S.C.No.23 of 2016 for the offences punishable

under Sections 427, 448, 506 of I.P.C. and Section 3(i)(v)(x) of the

SCs/STs (PoA) Act. The case for posted for arguments before the

trial Court. At that stage, the petitioner has filed certain

documents i.e., Ex D2 ex-parte judgment in O.S.No.16 of 2004

against which, an I.A.No.126 of 2016 before the Senior Civil

Judge, Nizamabad is pending. The trial Court, vide impugned

order, dismissed the said application stating that it was filed after

lapse of (18) months of completion of cross-examination of PW1

and PW2. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present

Criminal Petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the delay

cannot be a ground to dismiss the application as Section 311 of

Cr.P.C. permits the Court to re-open the case at any time of

proceedings. Therefore, he seeks to allow this Criminal Petition.

5. Learned counsel for unofficial respondent Nos.2 to 8

submits that the trial Court had rightly and appropriately passed

the impugned order and interference of this Court, at this stage,

is not warranted. Therefore, he seeks to dismiss this Criminal

Petition.

6. Having regard to the submissions of both the learned

counsel, this Court is of the opinion that there is no perversity in

the impugned order as re-opening the evidence of PWs.1 and 2,

after posting the matter for arguments, would ultimately cause

delay in dispensing justice. Hence, this Court is not inclined to

entertain this Criminal Petition.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

_____________________ E.V. VENUGOPAL, J Date: 12.02.2025 ESP

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E.V. VENUGOPAL

CRIMINAL PETITION No.12508 OF 2023

Dated: 12.02.2025

ESP