Suppression Of Material Facts Regarding Criminal Antecedents Disentitles Accused To Discretionary Relief Of Bail: Orissa High Court Section 311 CrPC | Delay Or Absence Of Examination-In-Chief No Bar To Summon Material Witnesses: Allahabad High Court Revenue Authorities Lack Jurisdiction To Declare Genuineness Of Wills Or Validity Of Settlement Deeds; Parties Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Demand Of Bribe Is Sine Qua Non For Conviction Under PC Act, Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money Not Enough: Bombay High Court 'Promotion Effected Long Ago Not To Be Disturbed': Supreme Court Sets Aside HC Order Quashing 13-Year-Old Promotion; Holds 'Laying Rules' Directory Not Mandatory "Mere Oral Assertion Or 'Data Loss' Letter Not Enough To Prove Driving Licence Validity; Owner Has Strict Duty To Ensure Renewal": Supreme Court Reinstates Insurer's Non-Liability, Applies 'Pay & Recover' Principle "Zero Tolerance To Corruption": Supreme Court Reinstates FIRs Against Karnataka Cops, Slams High Court For 'Mini-Trial' & Exceeding S.482 CrPC Powers ‘Ancillary Services Don't Override Carriage’: Supreme Court Upholds 7.5% Presumptive Income For Cruise Operators Under Section 44B IT Act, Rejects Revenue's Higher Tax Claim Division Bench Refuses To Quash FIR, Holds It Cannot Nullify Single Judge's Final Order Directing Registration Of Case: Allahabad High Court High Court Leave Under Clause XII Doesn't Protect Transferred Suits; Section 16 CPC Strictly Applies To City Civil Court In 'Suits For Land': Bombay High Court Joint Account Holder Who Didn't Sign The Dishonoured Cheque Cannot Be Prosecuted Under Section 138 NI Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Suits Cannot Be Consolidated If Parties, Properties, And Causes Of Action Are Different: Telangana High Court P&H High Court Halts All Construction In Mohali's Shivalik Foothills Over Failure To Demarcate 'Forest Land', Bars Land Sale No Embargo On Issuing Single Statutory Notice Under Section 138 NI Act For Multiple Dishonoured Cheques: Orissa High Court District Collector Has No Jurisdiction Under CrPC To Order Reopening Of Investigation Or Recall Of Closure Report: Madhya Pradesh High Court No Exclusive Monopoly Over Geographical Term 'Malabar' In Isolation; Protection Limited To Registered Composite Marks: Kerala High Court Person In 'De Facto' Control Is A Promoter Under Companies Act Even If Designated As Professional Director: Karnataka High Court Supreme Court Urges Mandatory Animal Tagging, Strict Enforcement of Gaushala Laws To Tackle Stray Cattle Crisis; Holds Owners Accountable "Don't Render Victims Remediless": Supreme Court Slams High Court For Dismissing Plea Over Stray Bull Death, Awards ₹15 Lakh Compensation Supreme Court Red-Flags 'Unregulated Shadow Work' of Private Investigators, Calls For Legislative Overhaul on Digital Evidence & Privacy Rights 125 CrPC | Wife 'Not Entitled To Interim Maintenance If Adultery Established Ex Facie': Supreme Court Evidence Against Absconder Invalid Without Prior S.299 CrPC Order: SC Acquits Murder Accused Ad Valorem Court Fee Mandatory For Section 54 Appeals Challenging Land Acquisition Awards: Supreme Court

Refused To Quash FIR: Continuity in Investigation but Prevents Arrest of Judicial Officers: Telangana High Court Directs

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Hyderabad, Oct 20, 2023 - In a significant decision, the Telangana High Court, presided over by Hon'ble Justice G. Anupama Chakravarthy, ruled that the investigation into a case involving multiple accused, including Judicial Officers, will continue. However, the court directed that the accused should not be arrested.

The case drew attention as both the complainant and one of the accused are Judicial Officers. Moreover, other accused also hold various positions in the judiciary or are family members related to the accused.

Justice Chakravarthy noted, "It is the specific contention of the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners that petitioner No.5, is brother-in-law of accused No.1, is also a Judicial Officer, and he was undergoing training during the period of alleged incident. But, he was falsely implicated in the case."

The court made a critical observation about the delay in filing the complaint. "The contents of the complaint itself disclose that there is a delay of eight months in preferring the complaint. The second respondent is not a layman but a Judicial Officer and cannot take a lame excuse for the delay in filing the complaint," said Justice Chakravarthy.

The case involves allegations of dowry harassment and caste-based discrimination among other charges, drawing charges under the IPC, the Dowry Prohibition Act, and the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes Prevention of Atrocities Act.

Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the state opposed the quashing of the FIR and contended that the complaint "is of six pages which has sufficient material to be investigated into."

The court concluded by stating, "This Court is of the considered view that the Investigating Officer shall continue the investigation and shall file an appropriate report before the concerned Court, but shall not arrest the petitioners herein."

With this order, the Telangana High Court has put a temporary halt to the arrest of the accused while allowing the investigation to proceed, emphasizing the necessity for due process and caution given the sensitive and high-profile nature of the case.

 Date of Decision: 20.10.2023

 Devarapalli Devendra Babu and Others vs The State Of Telangana and Others

         

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/20_October_2023-Devarapalli_Devendra_Babu_vs_The_State_Of_Telangana.pdf"]

Latest Legal News